 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Jackson v. Nicholson, 05-7187,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: VA properly set effective date of reopened claim for disability benefits pursuant to 38 U.S.C.S. § 5110(a). "Appellate decision," as used in 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(b), referred only to Board of Veterans' Appeals' decisions. As Board had denied veteran's original request to reopen, date he successfully submitted new evidence was effective date for claim.
|
|||||
| Liquid Dynamics Corp. v. Vaughan Co., 05-1105, 05-1325, 05-1366, 05-1399,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The district court committed no reversible error in denying a manufacturer's judgment as a matter of law for non-infringement where the jury could have reasonably discredited testimony that four tanks were outside of the scope of the patent claims and given more weight to the manufacturer's engineering manual.
|
|||||
| Medlin Constr. Group, Ltd. v. Harvey, 05-1514,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals' decision in favor of the government on a contractor's request for an equitable adjustment was reversed as the only reasonable interpretation of the contract allowed the contractor to choose to use concrete or polystyrene retainers in constructing a vehicle maintenance facility.
|
|||||
| Steider v. Nicholson, 2006-7097,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 1, 2006, Decided , June 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Sun Coast Merch. Corp. v. CCL Prods. Enters., 05-1173, 05-1216,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 1, 2006, Decided , June 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Tampoc v. Nicholson, 06-7022,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, June 1, 2006, Decided , June 1, 2006, 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. |
