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
The Wisconsin Supreme Courtruled on Wednesday that the Department of Health Services (DHS) lacked authority to limit capacities for indoor public gatherings. ” The Tavern League of Wisconsin, along with other businesses, challenged Emergency Order 3, arguing that the order was invalidly enacted. Wisconsin Stat.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court unanimously struck down a state law provision Friday that allowed police to draw blood from unconscious drivers and test it for alcohol content without a warrant. Many courts have addressed the issue of taking blood samples from drivers without consent, including Texas and Nevada.
Share The Supreme Court on Monday appeared sympathetic to the argument by a Catholic Charities chapter that Wisconsin violated the Constitution when it refused to give the group the same exemption from the states unemployment tax that it provides to churches, religious schools, and some religious groups.
“A dispute between Egg Harbor and a popular restaurant has just been settled by the Wisconsin Supreme Court; The Door County village condemned a strip of property at Shipwrecked Brewpub to build a sidewalk, which the property owner claimed was illegal by state statute”: Christopher Clough of The Green Bay Press-Gazette has this report.
The scene came to mind with a decision yesterday when the Wisconsin Supreme Court voted 4-3 in Sojenhomer v. ” Lawyers in Wisconsin are already sending around Bumble-like harrumphs to the decision, which is a testament to the ability of judges to ignore plain meaning to achieve desired results.
The Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas reversed the Board’s decision without affording any deference to the agency’s interpretation of the relevant statute. Later, the Ohio First District Court of Appeals held that a court must defer to an administrative interpretation only if the court finds a statute to be ambiguous.
Last year, the Supreme Courtruled 5-4 in McGirt v. The court thereby stripped Oklahoma state courts of jurisdiction over crimes committed by “any Indian” in “Indian country,” and bestowed the federal government with exclusive jurisdiction to try these crimes. Wisconsin v. Wisconsin v.
This week we highlight cert petitions that ask the Supreme Court to consider cases and statutes about suing various government entities, ranging from two counties to a state governor to the United States itself. The district courtruled that Ex parte Young applied because Congress’ approval of the compact made it binding federal law.
In covering the motions hearing last week in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, I noted a surprising comment from Judge Bruce Schroeder that he had “spent hours” with the Wisconsin gun law and could not state with certainty what it means in this case. It is also hard to instruct a jury on an ambiguous statute.
Prosecutors had argued that the claim was spurious on the grounds that the teenager’s decision to bring an AR-15 to the protest made him an “initial aggressor” under Wisconsin law. Howrey Professor of Law at the George Washington University Law School, state statutes vary widely on defining what constitutes aggression.
In 2008, the Supreme Court handed down a landmark ruling in District of Columbia v. City of Chicago , the courtruled that this right applied against the states. The high court has been carefully waiting for just the right case to address states and cities that have sought to limit gun rights. Penal Law § 400.00(2)(f)
The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Tuesday upheld lifetime GPS monitoring for some convicted sex offenders in Wisconsin. ” The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit previously addressed lifetime GPS monitoring for convicted sex offenders in Belleau v. .” Wall where the court upheld the statute.
Circuit also rejected EPA’s argument that the court did not have authority to review stays issued under Section 307(d)(7)(D) of the Clean Air Act. The district courtruled that EPA was required to conduct such evaluations in October 2016 and set an expedited schedule for EPA’s compliance. NEW CASES, MOTIONS, AND NOTICES.
Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Meier, Niklaus. Notification as a Ground for Refusal”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 81-95.
The appellate court also found that even if the trial court erred, the error was harmless because the State proved both acts beyond a reasonable doubt. Hawaii CourtRuled that Commercial Aquarium Fishing Required Environmental Review. Zepeda , No. 80593-2-I (Wash.
Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Meier, Niklaus. Notification as a Ground for Refusal”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 81-95.
Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Meier, Niklaus. Notification as a Ground for Refusal”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 81-95.
Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Meier, Niklaus. Notification as a Ground for Refusal”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 81-95.
Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Meier, Niklaus. Notification as a Ground for Refusal”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 81-95.
Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Meier, Niklaus. Notification as a Ground for Refusal”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 81-95.
Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Meier, Niklaus. Notification as a Ground for Refusal”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 81-95.
Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Meier, Niklaus. Notification as a Ground for Refusal”, Netherlands International Law Review (NILR) 67 (2020), pp 81-95.
The US Wisconsin Supreme Courtruled on Friday to reinstate the use of secure ballot drop boxes for the 2024 elections, reversing a prior ruling from 2022 by the court’s then-conservative majority that had banned this method for returning absentee ballots.
Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. Hunter “Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Liber Amicorum Natalia Ivanovna Marysheva, pp. David Walker (dir.),
Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. Hunter “Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Liber Amicorum Natalia Ivanovna Marysheva, pp. David Walker (dir.), 105-112 (available here ) III.
Ratification of the 2019 Hague Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters”, Wisconsin International Law Review 38 (2021), pp. Hunter “Codifying Comity: The Case for U.S. Liber Amicorum Natalia Ivanovna Marysheva, pp. David Walker (dir.), 105-112 (available here ) III.
In the other two, on April 22 and 30, the court will consider whether parents can opt to have their children excused from instruction with LGBTQ-themed storybooks, on religious grounds, and whether a Catholic online school can become the country’s first religious charter school.
Tamara Loertscher arrived at the Mayo Clinic Health System in Eau Claire, Wisconsin on Aug. The Taylor County Department of Human Services had issued a request for temporary physical custody under Wisconsin Act 292, dubbed the Unborn Child Protection Act. 1, 2014 despondent. Severe hypothyroidism fueled her anguish.
The New Jersey court also found no basis for Grable jurisdiction, rejecting the companies’ arguments that the City’s claims necessarily raised substantial and actually disputed issues of federal law such as First Amendment issues or issues addressed by federal environmental statutes.
Supreme Court held that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals erred when it concluded that its review of the remand order in Baltimore’s climate change case against fossil fuel companies was limited to determining whether the defendants properly removed the case under the federal officer removal statute.
The court also granted motions to strike the state law claims pursuant to California’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute. The court granted the company leave to amend its complaint with 21 days. Resolute Forest Products, Inc. Greenpeace International , No. 3:17 -cv-02824 (N.D.
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