 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Am. Trucking Ass'ns v. EPA, No. 98-1034,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Colon-Calderon v. DEA, No. 05-1417,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| DKT Int'l, Inc. v. United States Agency for Int'l Dev. , No. 06-5225,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: 22 U.S.C.S. § 7631(f) of the U.S. Leadership Against HIV/AIDS Act did not compel an organization to advocate the government's position on prostitution and sex trafficking; it only required that if the organization wanted to receive grant funding, it had to communicate the message the government chose to fund, which did not violate First Amendment.
|
|||||
| Decatur Liquors, Inc. v. District of Columbia, No. 05-7099 Consolidated with 05-7100,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's entry of summary judgment in favor of liquor licensees was reversed, and the case was remanded with instructions to dismiss their claim under the District's Home Rule Act without prejudice because their federal claims were insubstantial, and the district court could not exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the local claims.
|
|||||
| ExxonMobil Oil Corp. v. FERC, No. 05-1471 Consolidated with 05-1472,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Greene v. Dist. of Columbia, No. 06-7117,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant was not entitled to appointment of counsel when he failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits, and appellant's § 1983 claims were properly dismissed because the alleged facts did not demonstrate a violation of his constitutional rights.
|
|||||
| Long v. Peters, No. 05-5281,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Pioneer Indus. Ry. Co. v. Surface Transp. Bd., No. 06-1019,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Roberson v. Paulson, No. 05-5434,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, February 27, 2007, 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. |
