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:
More434 F.3d 30, UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v.Markeno WALTER, Defendant, Appellant. Here, Judge Ponsor the same district judge as in Jim nez only made statements indicating that he would likely have imposed a more lenient sentence if given the option to do so.
, 20, Class Certification., 8, To support this sentence, we added: If plaintiff had a lesser burden, then a motion to certify a Rule 23(b)(3) class would be granted despite the motion judge's belief that it is more likely than not that individual issues would predominate.Heerwagen, 435 F.3d at 233.
, 6, We review the IJ's finding that the Rodriguez marriage to Sepulveda was fraudulent in order to determine whether it is supported by substantial evidence, and we will uphold it unless the record would compel a contrary finding. See Laurent v. Ashcroft, 359 F.3d 59, 64 (1st Cir.
470 F.3d 390, UNITED STATES, Appellee, v.Steven A. MILKIEWICZ, Defendant, Appellant. Consequently, while in most cases a Rule 1006 chart will be the only evidence the fact finder will examine concerning a voluminous set of documents, see Air Safety, 94 F.3d at 7 n. 14;
449 F.3d 1035, Jerry BEEMAN and Pharmacy Services, Inc., dba Beeman's Pharmacy;, 12, The Pharmacies argue California Civil Code sections 2527 and 2528 require the PBMs to make studies available to third-party payors. The procedural injury would be redressed if the PBMs followed proper procedures.
Transamerica sold 1, 588 of these reverse mortgages, of which 760 had been sold in California. 115, the Court further stated that the class action judgment would have preclusive effect on absent class members only if those present are of the same class as those absent and . See 982 F.2d at 745.
469 F.3d 1, Ivette RIVERA RODR GUEZ, Glenda Neris Rivera, Plaintiffs, Appellants, v.Gregory BENINATO, Edwin L pez, Miguel Falc n, John Doe 04-CV1322, Jane Doe 04-CV1322, Defendants, Appellees. the failure of the officers to show the warrant to Ms. Rodr guez before commencing the search;
470 F.3d 22, In re Yury SHKOLNIKOV, Debtor.Mikhail Elkin et al., SELYA, Circuit Judge., 1, As a general rule, parties may appeal from a final decision, order, or judgment rendered by a court, but not simply from statements or findings contained in the body of such a decision, order, or judgment.
City of Fall River v. FERC, Nos. After that petition had been pending for nearly two years, petitioners filed the present mandamus petition with this court asking that we compel DOT (1) to adopt regulations to address safe siting and (2) to act on petitioners' petition for rulemaking.
464 F.3d 54, In re Ren V ZQUEZ-BOTET, Petitioner. They center on the fact that Chief Judge Fust 's wife, Rachel Brill, is a practicing attorney who has had some involvement with matters tangential to this criminal case. Petitioner makes much of the hourly fees paid to Brill by Laracy;
If appellant had made a colorable claim of entitlement to assert privilege because counsel also represented appellant in his personal capacity in connection with the conversation in question, the district court would have been obliged to grant intervention.
616, 116 L. Ed. 2d 638 (1991). And this issue goes to the heart of the ultimate question that Rochester poses, the spirit of which motivated our remand on this issue in Mid States: Why is it reasonable for the Board to require mitigation for wayside noise, but not for horn noise
Quaglia's state law claims. Johnson v. Gordon, 409 F.3d 12, 18 (1st Cir. focuses not on, every aspect of the copyrighted work, but on those aspects of the, plaintiff's work that are protectable under copyright laws and, whether whatever copying took place appropriated those protected, elements.
470 F.3d 422, Morgan CALVI, Plaintiff, Appellant, v.KNOX COUNTY et al. In her opposition to the defendants' motions for summary judgment, Calvi for the first time asserted a false arrest claim against Smith and failure to intervene claims against McLaughlin and Gracie. 99, 2 L. Ed. 2d 80 (1957)).
district court's judgment. Those proceedings are still, ongoing as a result of this court's remand of Enwonwu's claim for, relief under the Convention Against Torture to the Board of, Immigration Appeals for further consideration.hardly so extraordinary as to warrant coram nobis relief.
Without addressing whether a prejudice showing is always required under the new ERISA regulations, we find that Bard was prejudiced by the Plan's ERISA failures.15, 61, First, the Plan's failure to comply with the ERISA notice provisions significantly prejudiced Bard in his claim for benefits.
, 2, Plaintiff also brought supplemental claims under Puerto Rico, law, the dismissal of which is not on appeal here.and the dismissal of her EEOC charge on March 22, 2005, so a three-, to four-month tolling would possibly have made the charge timely. See Jorge, 404 F.3d at 565.Police of P.R.
Life, 165 F.3d at 99.1, At oral argument, the FRN defendants suggested that summary, judgment should have been denied because Indianapolis Life did not, identify the false income verification submission as the basis for, rescission in its letter informing the defendants of the recision, decision.
Bruni, 964 F.2d at 79. Bennett v. Barnett, 210 F.3d 272, 277 (5th Cir.2000) (noting that the Secretary took the position that plaintiff's emotional distress claim was covered by FECA, and holding that the district court did not have jurisdiction to decide FTCA claim for the same injury);
, 15, In this case, although the subject indemnity is broad enough to encompass indemnification of a claim brought by Caldwell against Haley, the contract bears no explicit indicia that the parties intended that interpretation. Caldwell argues that Massachusetts law requires such specificity.
