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
A federal appeals court threw out Rodney Reed’s federal civil rights lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Texas law governing DNA testing, explaining that Reed had filed his suit too late. But in a case in which the TCCA does grant rehearing, he added, the statute of limitations would start to run then.
Karim AA Khan stated that his office collected solid evidence suggesting that the Supreme Leader of the Taliban and the Chief Justice of the “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan” committed the crime of persecution on gender grounds, violating Article 7 (1) (h) of the Rome Statute.
The US Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from North Carolina on Monday over the constitutionality of a state law allowing employers to sue employees working as undercover investigators. The challenged statute, N.C. The court stated that the law substantially “burden[ed] newsgathering and publishing activities.”
Russian Federation under Article 63 of the ICJ Statute. Article 63 of the Statute of the ICJ , stipulates “the right to intervene in the proceedings,” with the caveat that “the construction given by the judgment will be equally binding” upon an intervening State, not just the States directly party to the dispute.
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces that had held the three prosecutions time-barred because it found a five-year statute of limitations for military rapes occurring between 1986 and 2006. In 2006, the UCMJ was amended to explicitly eliminate any statute of limitations for rape, rape of a child and sexual assault.).
Choosing between the two competing readings, “one limited and one near limitless,” the Supreme Court on Thursday handily rejected the government’s “boundless” interpretation of the aggravated identity theft statute. I guess we should all be glad that the court unanimously rejected the government’s interpretation of the statute.
The Ninth Circuit concluded that Vasquez-Borjas’ interpretation of the statute was unsupported and “accept[ed] California’s construction of its own law and conclude[d] that intent to defraud is a necessary element of all convictions under Section 472.”
The Supreme Court of India ruled Thursday that any acquisition of private property by the state must meet a set of criteria under Article 300A of India’s Constitution, which includes being carried out for a public purpose, following the law, and following proper procedure. This incident prompted Shah to petition the Calcutta High Court.
Share People given consecutive sentences under the federal law that imposes penalties for the use of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence or drug trafficking may now be entitled to a new sentencing hearing, thanks to the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling Friday in Lora v. United States.
Although the ICJ’s decision is final and binding on Malaysia, the Malaysian government applied for revision of the judgment in 2017 based on the discovery of new facts, pursuant to Article 61 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. However, the then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad dropped the application in 2018.
It is a well-known fact that there are two different sources of employment law: common law and statutes. While lay-off under Employment Standards Act, in general, is allowed, under the common law the same lay-off is treated as a breach of the employment contract and a constructive dismissal.
United States felt like a legislation class in law school, with various canons of statutory construction being bandied about. Dubin concerns the reach of the federal aggravated identity theft statute and whether a person must steal another’s identity to commit the crime. Share In many ways, Monday’s oral argument in Dubin v.
City of New York , a 2022 lawsuit brought by a group of cooperative apartment and other building owners seeking to invalidate Local Law 97 of 2019 , New York City’s building performance standard to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the City’s largest buildings. The court holds that the CLCPA does not preempt Local Law 97.
Where defendant governmental entity did not own the park where plaintiff was injured, and plaintiff was attending a concert in the park when she fell, summary judgment based on both the GTLA and Recreational Use Statute was affirmed. The Court next turned to whether summary judgment was appropriate under the Recreational Use Statutes.
Cordero-Garcia , involving whether a federal law that allows the government to deport noncitizens convicted of “an offense relating to obstruction of justice” applies even to cases that are not connected to open investigations or judicial proceedings. On Monday, the court will hear argument in a pair of cases, Pugin v. Garland and Garland v.
Defendant argued that plaintiffs knew about the alleged conversion in October 2009 and that the claim was therefore time-barred, but the trial court found that the statute of limitations did not begin to run until after the father’s death. Conversion is subject to a three-year statute of limitations. Code Ann. §
Share The Supreme Court on Tuesday unanimously struck down a Washington state law that was aimed at helping federal contract employees get workers’ compensation for diseases arising from cleaning up nuclear waste. The case, United States v. This concept is popularly known as “intergovernmental immunity.”.
Where premises liability plaintiffs could not show that defendant church, who was renting the property to another church, had constructive notice of a downed power line on the property that had most likely been down for approximately 26 hours, summary judgment was affirmed. In Kelly v. internal citation omitted). internal citation omitted).
Constructive Discharge in Violation of Public Policy A constructive discharge claim in California refers to a situation where an employer’s misconduct effectively forces an employee to resign. There are several elements that an employee must prove in order to succeed in a constructive discharge claim.
The statute indicates that any party to an IPR final-written-decision has a right to appeal. and (2) Is eligibility a pure questions of law (based upon the claims); or does it also involve a “question of fact for the jury based upon the state of the art at the time of the patent?” Qualcomm Incorporated , No. 35 U.S.C. §
a law firm, sent a petition one day late to request review in the U.S. The question in Boechler is whether the statute bars a taxpayer who missed the deadline from asserting equitable tolling, which allows courts to excuse missed deadlines in some circumstances. Advocates quickly dove into the details of sentence construction.
Share On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that a VA benefits decision that was based on an agency regulation in effect at the time the decision was rendered does not constitute “clear and unmistakable error” even if the agency regulation is later deemed to conflict with the text of the relevant benefits statute.
Yet, if a veteran fails to apply for those benefits within a year of discharge, they stand to lose thousands of dollars because the law currently does not permit equitable tolling – the doctrine that allows individuals, in some circumstances, to pursue a claim after a statutory deadline has expired. In Irwin v.
First, the applicant must meet precise eligibility requirements under the statute. That statute is known as the jurisdictional bar. 1252(a)(2)(D), a provision of a 2005 law known as the REAL ID Act, to argue that only questions of law or constitutional claims may be reviewed by a federal court. a green card).
The question before the court is a procedural one, focusing on the deadline for Reed to file a federal civil rights claim challenging the constitutionality of the Texas law governing DNA testing. The question that the justices will consider in Reed’s case is when the statute of limitations to pursue a federal civil rights claim begins to run.
1324(a)(1)(iv) , the federal law that criminalizes “encouraging or inducing” an immigrant to come or remain in the United States unlawfully, violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech. The justices first questioned Fletcher on how to interpret the law. Hansen when the Supreme Court heard argument on whether 8 U.S.C.
Where plaintiff tripped on an uneven sidewalk and brought a GTLA premises liability suit against defendant city, plaintiff could not show constructive notice because she could not show how long the condition had existed. The statute at the core of the appeal was Tenn. In Mitchell v. City of Franklin, Tennessee , No. Code Ann. §
The Chevron doctrine, a pillar of administrative law, also looms large in the case. Natural Resources Defense Council , determines when a federal court must defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute it administers. HHS’s arguments are primarily based on other sections of the Medicare statute which use the phrase “entitled to.”
As federal licensees, because of the federal criminal statute, broadcasters have been advised to avoid marijuana advertising, even as the states in which they operate have relaxed their marijuana laws. Then the President would have to sign the bill. The permittee faces a $6,500 fine for these violations.
De George , the Supreme Court held that the term “crime involving moral turpitude” in federal immigration law is not unconstitutionally vague. He became a lawful permanent resident after marrying a U.S. A list of all petitions we’re watching is available here. In its 1951 decision in Jordan v. citizen the following year.
The ICC prosecutor’s office did defer the investigation, as required by the Rome Statute , but continued to work closely with Afghan authorities with a view of “sharing the burden of the investigation.” Islamic State – Khorasan Province claimed responsibility for the attack shortly thereafter.
Congress created a process known as “adjustment of status” so that immigrants physically present in the United States could change their status to that of a lawful permanent resident (i.e., The Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the case on Monday. a green card holder) without having to leave the United States. citizenship.
In recent years, the Supreme Court has expressed misgivings about white-collar prosecutions under broadly worded statutes. Judge Gregg Costa, joined by six other judges, wrote that “[t]he Supreme Court’s message is unmistakable: Courts should not assign federal criminal statutes a ‘breathtaking scope’ when a narrower reading is reasonable.”
Hendrix turns on the interpretation of the federal habeas statute, as amended by the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. The statute replaced the habeas remedy with the motion to vacate, unless the “remedy by motion is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of [the prisoner’s] detention.”
Although it required invention in name, it was really just becoming a replacement to monopolies barred by the Statute of Monopolies (1624). . Not only are the questions now before me novel, but the whole law relating to patents may still, in this country, be regarded in that light. Van Ness argues that the U.S.
And while oral argument mainly involved a technical discussion about statutory meaning, several of the conservative justices toyed with the possibility of abandoning Chevron deference — the principle that the courts will defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of the statute that it administers.
The problem for Arellano was that a federal statute, 38 U.S.C. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that equitable tolling was not available to Arellano, but was split on whether the Section 5110(b)(1) was a statute of limitations, which presumes the availability of equitable tolling. The court also looked to United States v.
922(g) , the federal statute making it a crime for a convicted felon to possess a firearm, applies only to people who know they are “felons” within the meaning of that law. Jeffrey Fisher, a Stanford law professor representing Gary, defended the 4th Circuit’s structural-error approach.
Latty Distinguished Professor of Law and Co-Director, Center for Innovation Policy at Duke Law In a flurry of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has continued its skepticism of administrative agencies. deference to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes) in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Guest post by Arti K.
Passengers, Australian and non-Australian, want relief under the Australian Consumer Law ( ACL ). They commence representative proceedings alleging breaches of consumer law, and negligence in the Federal Court of Australia. Statute has left little of the common law untouched.
The court overturned a District Court ruling to invalidate a Berkeley, California, prohibition on natural gas infrastructure in newly-constructed buildings. Berkeley’s so-called “natural gas ban” was the first local ordinance in the country to effectively require all-electric construction of new buildings. Clean Air Act, not EPCA.
She asserted claims in tort and under the Australian Consumer Law ( ACL ) in schedule 2 to the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) ( CCA ) against companies behind the ship: Carnival plc and its subsidiary, Princess Cruise Lines Ltd (together, Princess ).
The case does not expressly decide any patent law issues, but does provide some guidance as to how courts should approach mixed questions of law and fact (such as claim construction) and the right to a jury trial. The court made no determination as to whether the API was actually copyrightable in the first place.
patent law. Although Deepsouth was barred from using Laitram’s patented inventions throughout the United States , Deepsouth began selling its deveining machine to folks outside of the US in a partially constructed form. ” However on certiorari, the Supreme Court felt itself bound by the statute and precedent.
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