 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Eccleston v. Oregon, No. 04-36122,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants were entitled to summary judgment as to an inmate's 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983, Eighth Amendment, and Fourteenth Amendment claims because, inter alia, he had no liberty interest in remaining free from placement in administrative segregation, and prison officials were not deliberately indifferent to his safety when they used a chemical agent.
|
|||||
| Edwards v. USS-POSCO Indus., Nos. 04-16481, 04-16774,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court properly granted summary judgment to a former employer on a former employee's race discrimination claim, which was brought under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1981, because the employee failed to raise a triable issue that similarly-situated, non-minority employees were treated differently, and therefore failed to show a prima facie case.
|
|||||
| Flowers v. Sause Bros., No. 04-16026,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| GRK Fasteners, LTD. v. Bennett, No. 04-36060,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not abuse its discretion when it found defendant in contempt for violating a preliminary injunction relating to the filing of any complaints concerning plaintiffs' fasteners; the injunction was not misleading, and the terms of the injunction tracked the language of the prior settlement that defendant approved and signed.
|
|||||
| Garcia-Herrera v. Gonzales, No. 04-70413,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Garcia-Olivares v. Gonzales, No. 04-75743,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the Board of Immigration Appeals did not have the benefit of the court's recent decision in Moran, which indicated that the adult immigrants were eligible for a family unity waiver, the immigrants remained eligible for cancellation of removal and the agency improperly pretermitted their applications.
|
|||||
| Gomez-Marin v. Gonzales, No. 04-72679,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Gonzalez-Gonzalez v. Gonzales, No. 04-71380,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Gurung v. Gonzales, No. 03-72571,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence supported the IJ's finding that the immigrant failed to establish a well-founded fear of future persecution. Because the immigrant did not meet the requirements for asylum, he also failed to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
