 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Avello v. SEC, No. 05-2850,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006*, Submitted* After examining the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The SEC's sanction of an accountant was affirmed. Accountant was liable under Nat'l Ass'n Sec. Dealers Manual R. 1022(b)(2) as a firm's "Limited Principal--Financial and Operations" for improper record keeping and reports that violated S.E.C. Rules 15c3-1, 17a-3, and 17a-5 when he knowingly reported or failed to inquire about incorrect information.
|
|||||
| Meisberger v. Cotton, No. 05-3388,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's § 1983 suit, alleging that state department of corrections officers violated Fourteenth Amendment rights by transferring him to another prison without due process, was properly dismissed under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915A(b)(1) because inmate had no liberty or property interest in remaining at prison or to benefits available to him there.
|
|||||
| Minson v. Vill. of Hopedale, No. 05-3362,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006*, Submitted* After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)., May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly concluded that arrestee was collaterally estopped from asserting equal protection claim in her second § 1983 suit because similar equal protection claim, which had been raised in prior civil rights suit, had been dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Court declined to sanction arrestee for filing frivolous appeal.
|
|||||
| Muhammad v. Ind. Bell Tel. Co., No. 05-4118,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A former employee's absences were not covered by Family and Medical Leave Act when her first certification expired before her unexcused absences occurred and her second certification did not state duration or frequency of her intermittent leave as required by 29 C.F.R. § 825.308(a), (b)(2) and employee failed to provide information when requested.
|
|||||
| Patmythes v. City of Janesville, No. 05-3074,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment in favor of city was vacated; employee raised genuine issues of material fact as to whether city's asserted non-discriminatory reason for discharge was pretextual. Factfinder was required to determine whether city's offered reason for discharges was lie to calm employees or whether it was to cover up disability discrimination.
|
|||||
| Qualls v. Cunningham, No. 05-4078,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment against student's Title VII claims of racially hostile educational environment was affirmed. No reasonable person could find student was deprived of educational opportunities because campus police kept tabs on him from distance and university administrators ignored his complaints. Police never threatened him or used racial slurs.
|
|||||
| Tiney-Bey v. Adams, No. 05-3487,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court dismissed appeal by pro se plaintiff of a district court order enforcing an oral settlement agreement between the parties to a suit involving religious discrimination in a treatment facility for sexually violent persons because plaintiff did not argue that the parties did not reach an agreement or that defendants had misstated its substance.
|
|||||
| United States v. Grant, No. 05-2658,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006, Submitted , May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's appeal was dismissed because defendant did not suggest that his guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary, so any argument about adequacy of plea colloquy would be frivolous, and defendant identified nothing that might rebut presumption of reasonableness given to sentence within properly calculated guideline range.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hernandez, No. 05-3227,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006, Submitted , May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant had not indicated that he wanted to withdraw his plea, any consideration of whether plea colloquy complied with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 would be inappropriate, and regardless, information omitted by district court in its R. 11 colloquy would be harmless error because each of warnings was outlined in defendant's written plea agreement.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
