 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Affordable Hous. Dev. Corp. v. City of Fresno, No. 04-15625, No. 04-15644, No. 04-15650, No. 04-15683, No. 04-15693, No. 04-15753, No. 04-15780, No. 04-17130, No. 05-15104,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Jury verdict that city's denial of bond approval under Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act, 26 U.S.C.S. § 147(f), had disparate impact on minorities and families with children did not entitle housing corporation to judgment because jury's finding that city had a legitimate reason for denying approval established a defense to disparate impact.
|
|||||
| Contract Mgmt., Inc. v. Rumsfeld, No. 04-15049,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly granted summary judgment to federal officials in a contractor's lawsuit challenging the redesignation of government contracts as "HUBZone" contracts under 15 U.S.C.S. § 657a; unlike the language governing the Small Business Administration's "Section 8(a) Program," the language in § 657a(b)(2) was mandatory, not discretionary.
|
|||||
| Erpelding v. Del. Charter Guar. & Trust Co., No. 04-55436,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the implementation of a decision to terminate an ERISA plan could give rise to fiduciary liability, the company's duties of making sure contributions to the plan were sufficient and properly terminating the plan were ministerial; company was not exercising discretion over plan assets and thus was not a fiduciary under 29 U.S.C.S. § 1002.
|
|||||
| Garcia v. CDC Dir., No. 04-17184,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Federal habeas court lacked jurisdiction to review state court decision based on evidentiary collateral estoppel issue that did not violate U.S. Const. amend. V; even if doctrine barred evidence as to molestation charge on which petitioner was acquitted, it would have restricted proof but not made conviction related to second victim impossible.
|
|||||
| Importante v. County of L.A., No. 04-55099,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a detainee asserted a Fourth Amendment unlawful search claim, defendants were entitled to summary judgment because the magistrate reasonably concluded, on the basis of particularized information provided by a confidential informant, that there was a fair probability that a search of the home would yield contraband or evidence of a crime.
|
|||||
| Isayan v. Gonzales, No. 04-75692,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Kaua v. Frank, No. 05-15059,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where state trial court enhanced inmate's sentence under Haw. Rev. Stat. § 706-662(4)(a) based in part on a finding that an extended sentence was necessary to protect the public, and the state judge, not a jury, made that finding, inmate's sentence violated the Sixth Amendment.
|
|||||
| LGS Architects, Inc. v. Concordia Homes, No. 04-16677,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Architectural firm was entitled to preliminary injunction prohibiting builder from reproducing, distributing, displaying, or creating derivative works based on architectural plans because builder exceeded scope of license when it used plans in second planned community and, thus, firm was likely to succeed on merits of copyright infringement claim.
|
|||||
| Lopez Perez v. Gonzales, No. 04-75061,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 11, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
