 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| City of St. Joseph v. Southwestern Bell Tel., No. 05-1800,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly struck an affidavit where it contradicted the affiant's prior deposition. Summary judgment was properly granted to a telephone company on a promissory estoppel claim as the city failed to show that the company had promised to have its telephone lines and facilities moved so that they did not interfere with a project.
|
|||||
| Horne v. Denny's Rest., No. 05-2194,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Rodriguez-Cuate v. Gonzales, No. 04-3883,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Neither the BIA nor the IJ abused its discretion in refusing to reopen an alien's in absentia deportation proceedings where the alien had not submitted an affidavit regarding his non-receipt of notice to the IJ and there was no other evidence to rebut the strong presumption that notice of the deportation proceedings had been properly served.
|
|||||
| United States v. Castaneda, No. 05-1010,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion to suppress contraband seized from his vehicle was properly denied because the police had probable cause, based on a lawful wiretap of a suspected drug dealer's phone and other circumstances, to believe that defendant's vehicle contained contraband; thus, the warrantless search was permissible under the "automobile exception."
|
|||||
| United States v. Cawthorn, No. 05-1892,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Lara-Garcia, No. 05-2098,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Scofield, No. 05-1576,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Tharp, No. 04-3772,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Torres-Hernandez, No. 04-3595,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 24, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
