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 - U. S. Supreme Court - January 13, 2004
	Illinois v. Lidster, No. 02-1060, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 13, 2004, Decided View this case - free   Overview: A highway checkpoint stop designed to obtain more information about a recent hit-and-run accident was constitutional because the relevant public concern was grave, the stop advanced the concern, and the stop interfered only minimally with liberty. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	In re Darks, No. 03-8260 (03A582)., SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 13, 2004, Decided View this case - free   Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	SEC v. Edwards, No. 02-1196, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 13, 2004, Decided View this case - free   Overview: A payphone sale-and-leaseback scheme promising a fixed rate of return rather than a variable return could be an investment contract, and thus a security, subject to the federal securities laws. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Verizon Communs., Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP, No. 02-682, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 13, 2004, Decided View this case - free   Overview: The customer alleged that the incumbent LEC filled rivals' orders on a discriminatory basis as part of an anticompetitive scheme to discourage customers from becoming or remaining customers of competitive LECs, thus impeding the competitive LECs' ability to enter and compete in the market for local telephone service. The Court determined that the complaint alleging breach of the incumbent LEC's duty under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to share its network with competitors failed to state a claim underof the Sherman Act. The incumbent LEC's alleged insufficient assistance in the provision of service to rivals was not a recognized antitrust claim under existing refusal-to-deal precedents. Traditional antitrust principles did not justify adding the present case to the few existing exceptions from the proposition that there is no duty to aid competitors. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Ward v. Darks, No. 03A584., SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 13, 2004, Decided View this case - free   Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Williams v. Taft, No. 03A590., SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, January 13, 2004, Decided View this case - free   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  |  Contact Us   Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.