 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Clason v. Johanns, No. 05-1547,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A decision by the Department of Agriculture that a farmer was not entitled to a lower repayment rate for a marketing assistance loan because the "delivery" required for the lower rate was physical delivery of corn was affirmed because the agency's interpretation was not plainly erroneous and the farmer did not show any inconsistent interpretation.
|
|||||
| Dodson v. Norris, No. 04-3724,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not err in dismissing inmate's complaint against prison officials for failure to exhaust; record did not show inmate filed grievances against officials, 42 U.S.C.S. § 1997e. Monetary damages claim against defendant in capacity as Criminal Justice Coordinator for Arkansas Supreme Court was properly dismissed with prejudice due to immunity.
|
|||||
| Groves v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., No. 05-2173,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an employee's treating physician's opinion was internally inconsistent, and provided no reliable objective evidence or other convincing medical proof to support a finding of a long-term disability, it was not unreasonable for an insurer to reject the treating physician's opinion in deciding to terminate the employee's ERISA benefits.
|
|||||
| Sellers v. Burt, No. 05-2497,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a prison inmate contended that equitable tolling should apply to render his habeas corpus petition timely since his counsel failed to communicate with him and did not send his case file, any ineffective assistance of counsel did not constitute extraordinary circumstances outside the inmate's control to warrant equitable tolling.
|
|||||
| United States v. Brenton, No. 05-3282,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was convicted on drug possession and conspiracy charges under 21 U.S.C.S. §§ 841 and 846, defendant's lack of notice that an officer would be called as an expert witness was not error since she made no request for a witness list prior to trial under Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(1)(G).
|
|||||
| United States v. Clyde, No. 05-3086,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the government presented limited physical evidence, the testimony of a coconspirator concerning drug purchases from defendant, corroborated by other witnesses and records, was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for a drug conspiracy offense, and the sentencing fact of a prior conviction was properly found only by the court.
|
|||||
| United States v. Delapaz, No. 05-2928,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where cooperating witnesses testified that defendant possessed gun during attempted drug deal, during statement that gun was protection from drug dealer, and during bartering of gun for drug debt, sentence enhancement for possession of gun in connection with drug trafficking was proper under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2D1.1(b)(1).
|
|||||
| United States v. Jacinto, No. 05-2681,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where passenger had not admitted to, and was not charged with, possession of shotgun found in defendant's car, and gun was not found near passenger, district court did not err by denying defendant sentence reduction under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B1.2.
|
|||||
| United States v. Thunder, No. 04-3780,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: At time of trial, two alleged sexual abuse victims were 12 and 11 years old. Order totally closing the courtroom to the public under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3509(e) was not narrowly tailored to the advancement of any compelling government interest or, in fact, to any identified interest at all. Therefore, defendant's Sixth Amendment rights were violated.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
