 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Goss Int'l Corp. v. Man Roland Druckmaschinen Aktiengesellschaft, No. 06-2658,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, June 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When the district court issued the injunction, foreign seller had not paid its judgment which arose under the since-repealed antidumping statute, 15 U.S.C.S. § 72; after the foreign seller paid the judgment, the maintenance of the antisuit injunction - which prevented the foreign seller from filing suit in Japan - could not be justified.
|
|||||
| Khamis v. Gonzales, No. 05-4448,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, June 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alien was properly denied asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief because reasonable fact finder could find that alien was not credible based on inconsistencies in record, including that alien testified that he had never been arrested but then offered into evidence a letter stating he had been arrested multiple times and tortured.
|
|||||
| United States v. Carter, No. 05-4414,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, June 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant forfeited his Ex Post Facto Clause claim, arising from application of 2001 federal sentencing guidelines to his case pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.11(b)(2), (3), because he had not raised it in prior sentencing appeal. Factual findings supported adoption of enhancement under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3C1.1.
|
|||||
| United States v. Paeper, No. 06-2617,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, June 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was properly enhanced under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B1.1(a) as it was undisputed that more than five persons were involved in conspiracy and that he directed others to obtain precursors for him and compensated some participants with small amounts of manufactured drugs in return for their obtaining supplies for him.
|
|||||
| Craftsmen Limousine, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., No. 06-1559,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Coachbuilder did not submit sufficient evidence of the existence of some entity - whether the vehicle manufacturer or the competitor individually, or acting as a cartel - with the means to exercise market power in the limousine industry; thus, summary judgment on the coachbuilder's 15 U.S.C.S. § 1 claims in favor of appellees was affirmed.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
