 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ancala Holdings, L.L.C. v. Price, No. 04-17180,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Breach of contract claim for failing to operate club as premium golf course was barred by Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-548's six-year limitations period, as breach accrued when LLC determined companies were not operating club in proper manner. Breach was not "continuous" on basis that separate obligation to operate club in proper manner accrued each day.
|
|||||
| Hale v. Norton, No. 03-36032,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court had jurisdiction under collateral order doctrine to consider inholders' challenge to National Park Service's authority to subject their request for a road access permit to NEPA review; NEPA review was appropriate because there was no per se conflict between 16 U.S.C.S. § 3170(b) and NEPA's requirements under 42 U.S.C.S. § 4332(C).
|
|||||
| Operating Eng'rs Local Union No. 3 v. Newmont Mining Corp., No. 04-16917,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where employee was discharged after CBA expired for alleged misconduct that took place five days before CBA expired, the district court properly granted union's motion to compel arbitration of the dispute pursuant to 29 U.S.C.S. § 185; the parties clearly agreed in CBA to arbitrate misconduct allegations and, thus, the dispute "arose under" CBA.
|
|||||
| Palma-Platero v. Gonzales, No. 05-74902,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Smith v. Ryan, No. 05-16072,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner was not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 on his claim that he was denied due process right to have jury determine whether charged offenses fell within statute of limitations because California Supreme Court had noted that statute of limitations was not element of offense insofar as definition of criminal conduct was concerned.
|
|||||
| Storrer v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., No. 05-15336,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insurer was not entitled to summary judgment on breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing claim because insured's reluctance in letting insurer use company to process insured's medical records was reasonable, as insurer could have gotten records from doctors. Policy did not predicate coverage on use of that company as document processor.
|
|||||
| United States v. Lopez, No. 05-50616,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was properly convicted upon guilty plea of violating 21 U.S.C.S. § 841(a)(1); motions to dismiss indictment and suppress evidence were properly denied because prosecution was not vindictive and parole search of defendant's residence pursuant to signed Cal. Penal Code § 3067(a) parole condition form did not violate U.S. Const. amend. IV.
|
|||||
| United States v. Milwitt, No. 05-10344,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because Government's evidence showed that the intent of defendant, a non-attorney, in filing Chapter 13 petitions without tenants' knowledge was to prevent tenants from discovering defendant's fraud, evidence was insufficient to prove that defendant had specific intent to defraud landlord creditors as charged in indictment under 18 U.S.C.S. § 157.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
