LexisNexis
  

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.


   Federal Courts - DC Circuit Court and Court of Appeals - April 6, 2007

  
Am. Orient Express Ry. Co., LLC v. Surface Transp. Bd., No. 06-1077 Consolidated with 06-1080, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Chinese Daily News v. NLRB, No. 06-1159 Consolidated with 06-1206, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Coosemans Specialties, Inc. v. Dep't of Agric., No. 06-1199, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Under the implied duty clause in 7 U.S.C.S. § 499b(4), USDA properly sanctioned a wholesale produce merchant and its two principals for bribing a USDA inspector to falsify certificates evaluating the condition of produce by revoking the merchant's license and barring the principals, as responsibly connected persons, from working in the industry.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Greenhill v. Spellings, No. 06-5030, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Because plaintiff sought over $10,000 in damages, 28 U.S.C.S. § 1346(a), and cause of action alleging contravention of settlement agreement by former supervisor at Department of Education constituted claim against US founded upon express or implied contract with US, 28 U.S.C.S. § 1491(a)(1), US Court of Federal Claims had exclusive jurisdiction.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Munaf v. Geren, No. 06-5324, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: District court had no power or authority to hear habeas case, as American citizenship could not displace fact of criminal conviction in non-United States court and permit district court to exercise jurisdiction over habeas petition.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
United States Dep't of State v. Coombs, No. 06-5114, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Decision of Foreign Service Grievance Board ordering reinstatement of Foreign Service officer was arbitrary and capricious because Board was not permitted to circumvent Rehabilitation Act (RA) by relying on general grievance language of Foreign Service Act and failed to state how "medically disqualified" related to reasonable accommodation of RA.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
United States v. Askew, No. 04-3092, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Unzipping of jacket during show-up was not unreasonable search under Fourth Amendment; unzipping promoted same government interest that justified show-up itself: interest in reliably determining whether defendant was armed robber; further, government's strong interest in identification of armed robber outweighed limited additional intrusion.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Williams v. Wash. Convention Ctr. Auth., No. 05-7170, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Appeal of dismissal of discrimination and retaliation case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because notwithstanding employee's good faith attempt, none of his communications with district court allowed by Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6) were official judicial actions and order purporting to reopen time to notice appeal was after appeal was forfeited.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Williams v. Wash. Convention Ctr. Auth., No. 05-7170, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free  

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Woodruff v. Peters, No. 05-5033, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free  

Overview: Where the employer terminated an employee's prior de facto accommodations that had been in place for several months, but allowed another worker telecommute, those actions cast doubt on the argument that the accommodation would impose undue hardship and summary judgment for the employer under the Rehabilitation Act was reversed.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Back to Top
  

  www.lexisnexis.com |  About LexisNexis |  Terms & Conditions |  Customer Support |  Sitemap |  Contact Us
  CopyrightŠ 2008  LexisNexis®  All rights reserved.