This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
It comes out of a corner of the legal world that was utterly unknown to me a year ago. But there has been a lot of uncertainty among the administrativelaw judges and counsel who handle these cases about how to do this in a way that complies with the relevant foreign law. The case of the day is Begisholli v.
Last week, broadcasters and broadcast journalists were abuzz with discussions of the FCC’s Media Bureau issuing a hearing designation order referring to an AdministrativeLaw Judge questions about the proposed acquisition of the TEGNA broadcast stations by Standard General Broadcasting.
The FCC had a large staff of AdministrativeLaw Judges who heard these cases, and they were usually quite busy. document production, depositions, interrogatories) like in any other court case, trying to get to the bottom of the specific issues presented in the case.
The seven-page unsigned opinion came in a challenge by Harry Calcutt, the former head of Northwestern Bank, to an order by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation that would bar him from working in the banking industry for life. But now Calcutt’s case will return to the FDIC, for it to take another look under the correct legal standard.
FDIC , involving separation of powers and administrativelaw claims. The FDIC board acted based on the recommendation of an administrativelaw judge who was removable by the federal Merit Systems Protection Board only for cause; the MSPB is in turn itself removable by the president only for cause. Chenery Corp.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content