 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Drake v. Koss, No. 05-1464,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, April 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Claims for injuries suffered by an inmate when he attempted suicide while in jail did not survive summary judgment because intervals in checking on him and not removing the bed sheets did not constitute deliberate indifference by the jailers under § 1983; the county and jailers were entitled to state official immunity for discretionary acts.
|
|||||
| Pediatric Specialty Care, Inc. v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., No. 05-1668,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, April 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Rights conferred by 42 U.S.C.S. §§ 1396d(a)(13) and 1396a(a)(30)(A) were clearly established federal rights that were enforceable by recipients and providers through a private § 1983 action. Directors were not entitled to qualified immunity since their failure to act in the needy children's best interest violated those clearly established rights.
|
|||||
| Pediatric Specialty Care, Inc. v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., No. 05-1115, No. 05-1116,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, April 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A preliminary injunction compelling a peer review organization to disclose to Medicaid service recipients and providers the names of physician reviewers who made determinations regarding whether children were eligible for treatment was reversed because the order conflicted with confidentiality regulations under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1320c-9(a)(2).
|
|||||
| United States v. Bueno, No. 04-2289, No. 04-2338,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, April 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant offered no evidence of the relative culpabilities of other participants in the offense, and his offense was a serious drug trafficking offense, which required considerable planning and time committment on his part, district court's downward departures under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual §§ 3B1.2, 5K2.20, were erroneous.
|
|||||
| United States v. Fowler, No. 05-2532,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, April 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence for bank robbery was reversed because the government materially breached its plea agreement by advocating for the imposition of the career-offender enhancement, in spite of its promise to recommend that the district court calculate the sentence based on an offense level that did not include that enhancement.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hammel, No. 05-1601,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, April 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Lopez, No. 04-2254,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, April 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Witness testified that defendant traveled from the west coast to witness's house to collect a large amount of cash that she owed a co-defendant and that the co-defendant frequently supplied the witness with drugs. This, along with other evidence, was sufficient to uphold defendant's conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine charge.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
