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 US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Friday partially revived a suit alleging improper FBI surveillance of Muslim residents of Southern California. The case was heard on remand from the United States Supreme Court and decided on the findings of the District Court. In the present case, Fazaga v.
Share The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that a group of Virginia drivers challenging a state motor vehicle law was not entitled to reimbursement of their attorneys fees even though a federal district court issued an order in their favor that temporarily prohibited the state from enforcing the law and the states legislature repealed the law.
Accordingly, Krasner invites the court to issue an injunction to restrain the petition. ” At this time, the civil lawsuit is in its early stages, but Krasner is planning to litigate the issue in court. The petition invites people to sign on in support of the First and Second Amendments.
Managing an increasing volume of cases and court deadlines– sometimes in multiple jurisdictions – is one of the biggest time management challenges for law firms. . The statute of limitations ran out due to his forgetting the deadline. A Tennessee lawyer was suspended and put on probation after failing to file a personal injury case.
The US Supreme Court Tuesday heard oral arguments in Gonzales v. The statute broadly shields online platforms from liability for content posted to the platform by its users. Instead, Stewart urged the the court to “distinguish carefully between liability for the content itself, [and] liability for statements about the content.”
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN), commenced hearings on the obligations of States concerning climate change on Monday. Article 65 of the ICJ Statute further establishes the court’s jurisdiction to provide advisory opinions.
The Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday affirmed a lower court’s ruling that a state law violated the youth plaintiffs’ right to a clean and healthful environment under the state constitution. ” The court also ruled against the state’s argument that the plaintiffs lacked standing in the case.
The US Supreme Court Monday ruled 6-3 in Shinn v. Ramirez that “a federal habeas court may not conduct an evidentiary hearing or otherwise consider evidence beyond the state-court record based on the ineffective assistance of state postconviction counsel.” However, [m]ake no mistake. However, [m]ake no mistake.
Here’s good news: There are now a variety of cutting-edge cloud-based tools available for litigators, ranging from software designed to streamline the pre-trial process to mobile apps created for use in the courtroom. This is because deadlines are an inescapable part of your practice if you’re a litigator.
“Parsing Invalidating Statutes (Part I)”: John F. Coyle has this post at the “Transnational Litigation Blog.” ” Therein, he writes, “There are hundreds of state statutes that direct state courts not to give effect to choice-of-law and forum selection clauses.”
The US Supreme Court, in a split decision, issued a brief statement on Thursday refusing to reinstate a Florida law that targets drag shows. A lower court order previously prohibited the law from coming into effect. The post US Supreme Court refuses to reinstate a Florida law targeting drag shows appeared first on JURIST - News.
Share At oral arguments earlier this week the Supreme Court was skeptical of the Food and Drug Administrations effort to block a North Carolina-based company from challenging the denial of its application to market e-cigarettes in the conservative U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, based in Louisiana.
Plaintiff Felix Kolotinsky brought the class action lawsuit with a demand for a jury trial in the US District Court for the Northern District of California San Francisco Division on behalf of a group of California residents who claim the company’s data collection practices violate California law. and 502 of the California Penal Code.
United States broke no new ground, as it followed a steady line of cases applying a rule under which time limits in federal statutes do not create jurisdictional bars unless the statute makes that intent clear. Sotomayor wrote that jurisdictional rules “have a unique potential to disrupt the orderly course of litigation.”
Share The Supreme Court on Tuesday heard the case of a Texas death-row inmate seeking DNA testing for evidence that he believes will clear him. 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.
The US Supreme Court Wednesday heard oral arguments in ZF Automotive US, Inc. a case concerning federal district courts’ authority to apply a particular statute to private commercial arbitral tribunals. ” The federal district court granted Luxshare’s application, and subpoenas were sent to ZF senior officers.
The United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments Monday in Federal Bureau of Investigation v. This doctrine allows the government to potentially dismiss litigation that would require disclosure of information damaging to national security. Fazaga and Unicolors, Inc. H&M Hennese & Mauritz.
Share Purdue Pharma’s bankruptcy deal, which will reach the Supreme Court for oral argument on Monday , is just one of many examples of recent unorthodox civil procedure maneuvers in public harms litigation. But can bankruptcy court solve a public health crisis?
As of date, in the absence of a separate statute, Section 89 of the Civil Procedure Code , as well as the rules framed by several high courts under that section, govern mediation in India. The draft bill considers the international practice of referring to ‘conciliation’ and ‘mediation’ as interchangeable words.
Some settle quickly after a case is filed, while others do not reach their denouement until after a trip up to the Federal Circuit or even the Supreme Court. There are of course more demanding situations, where licensing specialists may be brought in to assist the litigation team in an effort to protect the clients interests to their maximum.
If you’re like I was when I was working for a big commercial litigation firm, I assumed that since the public called personal injury attorneys the “ambulance chasers,” then personal injury paralegals were paralegals who worked for the ambulance chasers, and I never really thought much about it. Listen to the podcast episode.
Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit has handed down a decision that seems to suggest a general hostility towards arbitration as a tool for resolving disputes between businesses and their customers. The particular question before the court involves the procedures for deciding whether a dispute should be resolved by a court or an arbitrator.
Share On Tuesday, the court heard argument in Jones v. Hendrix , a case that exemplifies the Gordian knot that is the federal habeas corpus statute. Two decades into his prison term, the Supreme Court decided in Rehaif v. 922(g) and sentenced to more than 27 years’ incarceration. In 1948, Congress passed 28 U.S.C.
Know the Statute of Limitations Period. The statute of limitations is a time limit on a particular cause of action. The failure to commence a lawsuit within this time period will likely result in the lawsuit being dismissed by a court. Know the Litigation Process. initial intake). Learn Medication Abbreviations.
Those who spoke extensively, however, seem ready to reject the government’s argument that the statute of limitations at issue here is a strict jurisdictional rule, as opposed to a “mere” claims-processing rule, which could be waived in an appropriate case. Rather, i]t was, does the six-year statute apply or does the 12-year statute apply?
The case asks what a trial court should do if it denies a defendant’s motion for arbitration. The Federal Arbitration Act gives the defendant the right to an immediate (“interlocutory”) appeal, but it says nothing about a stay of litigation in the district court. Two points were central for them.
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of Rodney Reedy, a Black death row inmate seeking post-conviction DNA evidence to prove his innocence, reports Ariane de Vogue for CNN. How the Supreme Court rules could impact other death row inmates across the country seeking to test new evidence.
Share Federal courts employ the All Writs Act to serve countless ends, from assisting FBI investigations to prohibiting vexatious litigation to requiring Apple to access data. This statute, which was originally part of the Judiciary Act of 1789, empowers federal courts to “issue all writs” (i.e., In Shoop v.
Share The Supreme Court on Monday sent a pair of challenges to laws in Texas and Florida that would regulate how large social media companies control content posted on their sites back to the lower courts for another look. The court agreed to send the cases back to the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 5th and 11th Circuits.
But what do you do when your first day starts with 60 active pre-litigation files assigned to you? Even if you’re in a different practice area, some of these will also apply to you, whether in personal injury, real estate, or commercial litigation. . 3 – Know the Litigation Process. Or maybe you transferred from another firm.
As there are no laws in Mali to aid the plaintiffs in seeking damages or civil remedies against foreign exporters, they brought their claims under US law, specifically the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act and the Alien Torts Statute. Several of the companies have declined to comment on the pending litigation.
(Photo by Bill O’Leary/The Washington Post via Getty Images) One of the quickest lessons you pick up in law school is that the path to knowing the law doesn’t end at finding a line in the Constitution or a statute and reading it aloud to anyone who would hear it. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, Alana C.
Share In a major ruling, the Supreme Court on Friday cut back sharply on the power of federal agencies to interpret the laws they administer and ruled that courts should rely on their own interpretion of ambiguous laws. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.)
McGills brief argued that a jurisdictional problem (based on the courts decision in Badgerow v. It took Roberts 10 separate questions to elicit that admission! The main substantive debate in which the justices engaged was whether the voluntary dismissal of the original case was the kind of final proceeding to which Rule 60(b) would apply.
The Ninth Circuit recently addressed the issue of whether parties can contractually agree to shorten the statute of limitations period for bringing a copyright infringement claim. Normally, the statute of limitations for a copyright violation is three years. In an unpublished opinion in the case, Evox Productions, LLC v.
Share The Supreme Court on Tuesday dealt another blow to prisoners challenging their state-court convictions and sentences in federal court. He wanted to use that information in his federal habeas corpus proceedings, i.e., his challenge to his state-court conviction and death sentence. In a 5-4 decision in Shoop v.
Share The Supreme Court on Monday heard oral argument in Patel v. Garland , an immigration case that raises a question about federal court review for noncitizens who were denied certain types of discretionary relief. First, the applicant must meet precise eligibility requirements under the statute. a green card).
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Monday in Patel v. Garland (“the immigration case”) asking whether a federal court can review a decision by an agency within the Department of Justice ruling that a person is ineligible for permanent residency and in Hughes v. Thus, Patel sought review before the Supreme Court.
billion settlement to conclude a 325-member class litigation launched by Indigenous Canadians affected by the country’s condemned residential school program, which sent 150,000 children into 139 residential schools from the late 1800s to the 1990s. The Canadian government Saturday announced a $2.8
Two years ago, the Uniform Law Conference of Canada (ULCC) released a revised version of the Court Jurisdiction and Proceedings Transfer Act (CJPTA), model legislation putting the taking of jurisdiction and staying of proceedings on a statutory footing. The statute is available here. The core features of the ECJA are unchanged.
The courses in legal research and writing equipped me with the ability to efficiently locate and analyze relevant statutes, regulations, and case law. Understanding Legal Procedures I was exposed to multiple areas of law such as Civil Litigation, Criminal Law, Business law, etc., This is what you’ve been looking for!
Share The Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the Department of Justice has broad, but not unfettered, authority to dismiss whistleblower lawsuits filed under the False Claims Act’s qui tam provision even when the government initially elected to allow the whistleblower to proceed with the action.
Transform Holdco LLC resolves a technical question of bankruptcy law, holding that courts should not treat as “jurisdictional” a provision limiting the relief available when an appellate court disagrees with a trial court order authorizing a sale of the bankrupt’s assets. Now we get to the issue before the court.
Claud & JP Ellison Last June, the United States Supreme Court issued four landmark decisions that curbed executive agency powers. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a combined case that may add a fifth decision to the starting lineup of how we discuss agency limitsor, at least, litigation about agency limitsgoing forward.
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