 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Diggs v. Hulick, No. 05-4563,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's § 2254 petition was properly denied because state court did not unreasonably apply United States Supreme Court precedent when it found that prosecutor's references to evidence about inmate's confession as "unrebutted" and "uncontradicted" did not violate Fifth Amendment as prosecutor was merely emphasizing strength of its case.
|
|||||
| Peterson v. Euromark Designs, Inc., No. 06-4363,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Simtion v. Gonzales, No. 06-3342,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: BIA properly denied alien's second motion to reopen in absentia removal order because he failed to make showing required by 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252b(c)(3)(B) as counsel received written notice of hearing to determine if there was excuse for his absence at first hearing where he was ordered in absentia, so alien received notice under § 1252b(a)(2)(A).
|
|||||
| United States v. Beier, No. 06-3374,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's appeal from his statutory maximum 360 month sentence, imposed under 18 U.S.C.S. § 2251(e), was denied. He did not present evidence showing that the facts of his case made him less able to avoid becoming child molester or child pornographer. No unwarranted disparity arose under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) from imposition of a maximum sentence.
|
|||||
| United States v. Flores, No. 03-2891,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Lundy, No. 06-2749,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Ammons-Lewis v. Metro. Water Reclamation Dist., No. 05-3123,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The grant of summary judgment to the employer on the Title VII and § 1983 claims was affirmed; the instructions reflected a true and complete summary of the relevant law, recognized the distinction between employer liability for the conduct of co-workers and liability for the conduct of supervisors, and gave the jury an accurate roadmap to follow.
|
|||||
| Dollie's Playhouse, Inc. v. Nable Excavating, Inc. (In re Dollie's Playhouse, Inc.), No. 06-2687,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Spiegla v. Edward Hull, No. 05-3722,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
