 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| KLLM, Inc. v. Fed. Motor Carrier Safety Admin., No. 06-1152,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, May 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Edwards, No. 04-3038,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, May 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Howard, No. 04-3054,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, May 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Kosh, No. 05-3077,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, May 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err in imposing 18-month term of imprisonment after revoking defendant's supervised release under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3583(g) because 18 U.S.C.S. § 3582(a) did not plainly apply to 18 U.S.C.S. § 3583(g) and sentencing court could consider rehabilitation when imposing term of imprisonment upon revocation of supervised release.
|
|||||
| AT&T Corp. v. FCC, No. 05-1171,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: FCC's rulings allowing local exchange carriers exogenous rate-making treatment of post-retirement benefits other than pensions were not arbitrary and capricious under Administrative Procedure Act because the Commission's interpretation of its treatment of costs as beyond the carriers' control due to accounting changes was consistent with precedent.
|
|||||
| Frontier Pipeline Co. v. FERC, No. 04-1343 Consolidated with 04-1344 and 04-1349,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: FERC improperly required crude oil carriers to pay shippers reparations for excessive rates because FERC should have determined the reasonableness of joint rate under 49 U.S.C.S. app. § 1(5) by assessing it as a whole rather than simply by reference to one segment where it made no effort to explain how local rates were more suitable than divisions.
|
|||||
| Lindsay v. Gov't Emples. Ins. Co., No. 05-7046,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT, May 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court improperly denied Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 class certification as to overtime "opt-out" claims under New York Minimum Wage Act for employees who did not affirmatively join FLSA claim because 29 U.S.C.S. § 216(b) did not preclude exercise of supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1367(a) where both claims formed common nucleus.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
