2004

| Table of Contents

| Federal Court Forms

| Law Journals-us

| FRCP-Appendix of Forms-LII

| Law Dictionaries

FederalCivilProcedure.Com		Constitutional Law
	US Circuit Court of Appeals	BankruptcyCode.US
	8th Circuit Case Summaries	UnitedStatesLaw.Us
	05-25-2004	Entertainment

US Codes

| Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

| Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure

| Federal Rules of Evidence

| News

A Legal and Business Portal
to The world wide Web

US Circuit Court of Appeals
8th Circuit Case Summaries

2004/05/25

========================================================================
OPINION SUMMARIES - May 25, 2004
U.S. 8TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
========================================================================
TABLE OF CONTENTS

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CONTRACTS
* THE HARDESTY CO., INC. v. WILLIAMS

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE
* ORTIZ v. FORT DODGE CORR. FACILITY

IMMIGRATION LAW
* SIVAKARAN v. ASHCROFT

========================================================================

CIVIL PROCEDURE, CONTRACTS

THE HARDESTY CO., INC. v. WILLIAMS, No. 03-2915 (8th Cir. May 25,
2004)
Covenant not to compete did not contain any specific restrictions on
defendant's ability to lease real property to a competitor of
plaintiff.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:

[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/032915p.pdf

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CRIMINAL LAW & PROCEDURE

ORTIZ v. FORT DODGE CORR. FACILITY, No. 03-1868 (8th Cir. May 25,
2004)
Prison regulation limiting prisoners' ability to correspond in
languages other than English was reasonably related to a penological
interest, and district court did not err in finding for defendants
on claim that the regulation violated plaintiff's First Amendment
right.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:

[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/031868p.pdf

IMMIGRATION LAW

SIVAKARAN v. ASHCROFT, No. 03-1158 (8th Cir. May 25, 2004)
Immigration Judge's determination that petitioner's testimony
regarding past persecution was not credible was entitled to
deference as it was supported by specific, cogent reasons for
disbelief.

To read the full text of this opinion, go to:

[PDF File]
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/031158p.pdf

Practice Resources for the Professional