Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
Find the right lawyer for your legal problem

Faster, Smarter and More Accurate

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit (in case citations, 1st Cir.) is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:

More
Find Case Laws by Filters
Sort byYou can sort data by applying different sort criteria
Most Lastest
Most Earliest
The Last Three Years
United States of America and Vincent Mercugliano, Special Agent, Internal Revenue Service v. First Bank, 962 (1984)

737 F.2d 269, 84-2 USTC P 9600, UNITED STATES of America and Vincent Mercugliano, SpecialAgent, Internal Revenue Service, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v.FIRST BANK, Defendant-Appellee. 2486, 2497, 65 L. Ed. 2d 532 (1980), there is nothing in the statute's language that supports a contrary reading.

# 1
Kleiner v. First National Bank of Atlantic, 84-8702 (1984)

751 F.2d 393, Kleinerv.First National Bank of Atlantic**, NO. 84-8702, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit., DEC 21, 1984, 1, Appeal From: N.D.Ga., 2, AFFIRMED., **, Local Rule: 25 case

# 2
Charles Fisher v. First Stamford Bank and Trust Company, 84-7258 (1984)

751 F.2d 519, 39 U.C.C., 36, The district court recognized, and Fisher did not dispute, that Reader was without authority to enter into a stock option agreement with the plaintiff. Connecticut law reserves to boards of directors the right to grant options and specify their terms.

# 3
First Am. Fin. Corp. v. Golf Host So. Inc, 84-7143 (1984)

738 F.2d 418, First Am. Fin. Corp.v.Golf Host So. Inc., 84-7143, United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit., 5/4/84, 1, E.D.N.Y., DISMISSED

# 4
First American Fin Corp. v. Golf Host So Inc, 84-7143 (1984)

751 F.2d 368, First American Fin Corp.v.Golf Host So Inc., NO. 84-7143 (R), United States Court of Appeals, second Circuit., OCT 01, 1984, 1, Appeal From: E.D.N.Y., 2, AFFIRMED.

# 5
First Nat. Bank of New Jersey v. Connecticut College, 84-5326 (1984)

755 F.2d 918, First Nat. Bank of New Jerseyv.Connecticut College, 84-5326, United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit., 12/4/84, D.N.J. Lacey, J., AFFIRMED

# 6
Crocker v. First Hudson Associates, 84-5316_1 (1984)

738 F.2d 421, Crockerv.First Hudson Associates, 83-5676, 84-5316, United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit., 6/19/84, D.N.J. Biunno, J. , 583 F. Supp. 21, AFFIRMED

# 7
First Pennsylvania Bank v. Travelers, 84-5055 (1984)

748 F.2d 689, First Pennsylvania Bankv.Travelers**, NOS. 84-5055, 84-5127, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit., NOV 20, 1984, 1, Appeal From: S.D.Fla., 2, AFFIRMED., **, Local Rule: 25 case

# 8
J.C. Trahan v. The First National Bank of Ruston, 84-4333 (1984)

747 F.2d 990, J.C. In this third appeal, plaintiff-appellant Trahan contends that the district court erred in denying him recovery under a supersedeas bond for the decline in value of stock awarded him following the original trial of this matter. This Court affirmed the district court judgment.

# 9
Jackson v. First Fidelity Financial, 84-4189 (1984)

746 F.2d 811, *Jacksonv.First Fidelity Financial, 84-4189, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit., 10/17/84, 1, S.D.Miss., AFFIRMED, 2, * Fed.R.App.P. 34(a); 5th Cir.R. 34.2.

# 10
84-3208 (1984)

746 F.2d 200, 53 USLW 2221, 39 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 967, CHRYSLER CREDIT CORPORATION, a Delaware Corp.v.FIRST NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF WASHINGTON

# 11
84-3063 (1984)

1690, 56 L. Ed. 2d 132 (1978).7 In sum, we are convinced that the record in this case fails to establish the minimum contacts necessary to secure personal jurisdiction over the defendant Utah bank. Brilmayer, How Contacts Count: Due Process Limitations on State Court Jurisdiction, 1980 SUP.CT.REV.

# 12
R.S. Martin, Jr. v. Kilgore First Bancorp, Inc. And Kilgore First National Bank, 84-2199 (1984)

747 F.2d 1024, R.S., 9, Prior to the auction date plaintiffs filed suit against Bancorp and the surviving bank, Kilgore First National Bank (First National II), challenging the results of the Comptroller's appraisal, as well as the propriety of his action in making the appraisal at all.

# 13
In Re Stephen Tse, 84-1847 (1984)

748 F.2d 722, In re Stephen TSE, Appellant. Section 2(b)(1) of the Public Law 98-368, however, does provide a procedure whereby the Commission can obtain court enforcement of its subpoena, and disobedience of the enforcement order becomes punishable as a contempt of court.

# 14
84-1802 (1984)

Franchise Tax Board v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. at 103 S.Ct., 19, A writ of mandamus shall be issued requiring the federal district court to vacate the orders in this case and to remand this case to the Superior Court of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

# 15
84-1787 (1984)

746 F.2d 1473, Skrekis (E. Katherine)v.Reid (C.E.), Rine (Patricia), Thompson (Jane), Thompson (Kirby), Sitko (Edwina Adamo), Petroplus (Bessie), Romick (Robert), Deacons of FirstBaptist Church, Margaretes (George), Holleman (I.D.), NO. 84-1787, United States Court of Appeals, fourth Circuit.

# 16
Jane Doe v. Claire Donovan, 84-1701 (1984)

747 F.2d 42, Jane DOE, Petitioner, Appellant, v.Claire DONOVAN, et al., 5, The Commonwealth contends that the double jeopardy clause did not require the trial court either to inquire whether the jurors had reached a partial verdict on the murder complaint, or to accept a partial verdict.

# 17
Alcaide v. Wilkes Industries, Inc, 84-1586 (1984)

753 F.2d 1067, Alcaidev.Wilkes Industries, Inc., 84-1586, United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit., 11/8/84, 1, D.R.I., AFFIRMED

# 18
Mohr v. General Elec. Co, 84-1584 (1984)

753 F.2d 1067, Mohrv.General Elec. Co., 84-1584, United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit., 12/4/84, 1, D.Mass., AFFIRMED

# 19
Bankr. L. Rep. P 70,136 Robert J. Brown, Trustee v. First National Bank of Little Rock, Arkansas, Ark-La Materials, Inc., Debtor, 84-1582 (1984)

748 F.2d 490, Bankr., Robert J. Brown, Little Rock, Ark., James C. Clark, Jr., Little Rock, Ark. The bankruptcy court denied the claim holding that the funds which were transferred were not property of the estate and that the note payment was therefore not a preferential transfer of debtor's funds.

# 20

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer