 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Nat'l Air Traffic Controllers Ass'n AFL-CIO v. Fed. Serv. Impasses Panel, No. 05-5076,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court lacked jurisdiction to hear the Federal Services Impasses Panel's (FSIP) decision to refuse assistance in a collective bargaining dispute because 5 U.S.C.S. § 7119(c)(1) was not sufficiently clear and mandatory to require the FSIP to exercise jurisdiction; also, the unions did not show a lack of a means of vindicating their rights.
|
|||||
| Nat'l Treasury Emples. Union v. FLRA, No. 04-1433,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A non-negotiability determination from the Federal Labor Relations Authority regarding a proposal on a weapons policy was reversed because a proper two-prong analysis under 5 U.S.C.S. § 7106(b)(3) was not conducted. There was no explanation for the conclusion that the minimal benefit was outweighed by an agency's interest.
|
|||||
| PPL Mont., LLC v. Surface Transp. Bd., No. 04-1369,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a shipper challenged the reasonableness of a carrier's rail rates and included cross-over traffic in the stand-alone railroad, the Surface Transportation Board did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the complaint, because, inter alia, the application of its cross-subsidy test was a reasonable interpretation of the Guidelines principles.
|
|||||
| SEC v. Lines Overseas Mgmt., No. 06-5002,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Thompson v. England, No. 05-5082,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. British Am. Tobacco Austl. Servs., No. 04-5358, No. 05-5129,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a subsidiary's motion for expanded intervention was properly denied as untimely under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a), it could not, as a nonparty who did not object to the order, appeal an order overruling its principal's objections to the testimonial evidence produced by the government in a RICO action.
|
|||||
| Zivotofsky v. Sec'y of State, No. 04-5395,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 17, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A child had standing under Article III to bring an action because, inter alia, his allegation that Congress conferred on him an individual right to have "Israel" listed as his place of birth on his passport was at the least a colorable reading of § 214(d) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act and the child alleged a violation of that right.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
