 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Huber v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., No. 06-2238,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, May 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In this action under the ADA and the Arkansas Civil Rights Act of 1993, the grant of summary judgment to the employee was reversed because the ADA did not require the employer to turn away a superior applicant for the router position in order to give the position to the employee.
|
|||||
| Loop v. Hennepin County, No. 06-1340,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, May 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Loop v. United States, No. 06-3402,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, May 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Comstock, No. 06-2344,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, May 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Nading, No. 06-2932,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, May 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court's imposition of 24-month sentence upon revocation of defendant's supervised release after his sweat patch tests were positive for methamphetamine use was affirmed because sentence was within statutory limits under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3583(e)(3) and was based upon district court's consideration of appropriate 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) factors.
|
|||||
| Frenchman v. Saloum, No. 06-1986,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, May 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Doctor was properly granted summary judgment on inmate's Eighth Amendment 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 claim alleging deliberate indifference to serious medical needs because inmate was given regular "heart and pacemaker checkups" including electrocardiograph (EKG) tests; doctor routinely read EKG results; and doctor hospitalized inmate when problem arose.
|
|||||
| Hassan v. City of Minneapolis, No. 06-3504,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, May 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decedent aggressively brandished a machete and a tire iron while approaching officers in a threatening manner and did not slow down, although the officers repeatedly asked the decedent to put down his weapons and deployed tasers against him a total of five times; the officers use of deadly did not violate decedent's Fourth Amendment rights.
|
|||||
| Rambo Assocs. v. South Tama County Cmty. Sch. Dist., No. 06-1695,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, May 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Architectural firm was limited to recovering a specific sum in a contract with a school district for services it agreed to perform for that sum. However, it was not barred from pursuing an unjust enrichment claim as to services outside the scope of the work it agreed to provide for the limited sum, so long as the district requested such services.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
