"I'll take a look (at prior case law) when there's more time," Goldgar said.
|
|
The Supreme Court unanimously rejected such broad interpretation of bribery in a prior case.
|
|
He was also ordered to perform 60 hours of community service in his prior case.
|
|
They relied on his credibility in a prior case and yet, he was passing on secondary information.
|
|
In that prior case, he pleaded guilty to impersonating an Army officer, forging a judge's signature and stealing a car.
|
|
In my prior case, it was introduced to my attorney, Sally Butler, and it was something that we had spoken about.
|
|
It was written by the liberal Justice Stevens based on the reasoning in a prior case written by the conservative Justice Rehnquist.
|
|
Moreover, it would allow the government to broaden the element of trying to "corruptly" influence to an extent never reached in any prior case.
|
|
Again, this claim would allow the government to broaden the element of trying to "corruptly" influence to an extent never reached in any prior case.
|
|
The SEC hasn't cited "any prior case in the last decade" in which it has sought a contempt order of this kind, the lawyers said.
|
|
In the prior case lodged in 2008 by the Palm Beach County State's Attorney's Office, Epstein pleaded guilty to prostitution-related charges involving an underage girl.
|
|
" In another email, Fromme wrote that sharing information from a prior case would be "akin to showing our entire poker hand in advance of placing our bets.
|
|
Robart asked detailed and nuanced questions throughout the hearing, and when the government tried to distinguish a prior case, he recited facts and arguments from the states' briefs.
|
|
Ultimately, when a worker was moved from one case to another the agency was slow in cutting off the person's ability to access information on the prior case.
|
|
In the most recent prior case, Microsoft is challenging a U.S. court's ruling that the company needs to turn over a customer email belonging to a non-U.
|
|
The 16th Amendment says that Congress can collect taxes on "incomes" without worrying about apportionment, even if the tax would have been a direct tax under prior case law.
|
|
In the history of American foreign relations, we are unaware of any prior case — in 230 years — of a president asking a foreign leader to intervene in American domestic politics.
|
|
Jeffrey Yohai, a former business partner of Manafort's, was already facing potential jail time after pleading guilty in February in the prior case, which involved misuse of real estate loan funds.
|
|
Oral arguments on cases are an important part of the resolution of a dispute, but they are secondary to the written briefs and prior case law on which justices base their decisions.
|
|
Judge Gorsuch insisted that it would be "unfair" to litigants before the Supreme Court to "tip his hand" on how he regarded prior cases — any prior case, no matter how ancient or uncontested.
|
|
"We are very glad that Judge Berman is allowing some of the victims to speak their truth in open court," Spencer Kuvin, a Florida lawyer involved in Epstein's prior case, said in a statement.
|
|
Acknowledging that its prior case law was "a mess" and "a hash," an en banc federal appeals court on Thursday adopted a new standard for deciding race- and gender-based employment discrimination cases without trial.
|
|
Job discrimination: The full Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overruled a prior case and ruled that a black employee should be able to present to a jury claims of racial harassment, hostile work environment, and retaliation.
|
|
On this last point, a prior case does exist in which a patient's DNR tattoo did not reflect their wishes (as the authors wrote in this 2012 report: "...he did not think anyone would take his tattoo seriously...").
|
|
"A defendant and his/her cleared counsel in a criminal prosecution may only obtain access to classified U.S. government information when such classified material is deemed both 'relevant' and 'helpful to the defense,'" they wrote, citing prior case law.
|
|
A majority of U.S. Supreme Court justices signaled concern that Castille participated in the case, but some indicated it would be difficult to set rules on what level of involvement in a prior case should require a judge to step aside.
|
|
The new charges, which were unsealed on Wednesday, involve several fraud schemes similar to the conduct in the prior case in which Yohai had pleaded guilty, the U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California said in a press release.
|
|
Four historians delivered a verdict: "In the history of American foreign relations, we are unaware of any prior case — in 230 years — of a president asking a foreign leader to intervene in American domestic politics," something Trump has now done multiple times.
|
|
Even the prior case years in which the Russians did try to recruit Page were used against him, despite the fact that Page was not then an agent for the Russians and had cooperated with U.S. officials in outing the Russian approach.
|
|
The list from the Congressional Research Service includes "only those cases in which the Court has explicitly stated that it is overruling a prior case, or issues a decision that is the functional equivalent of an express overruling," according to the compilation.
|
|
As to the effect of a presidential pardon, Bolton explained, "It does not erase a judgment of conviction, or its underlying legal and factual findings," citing a prior case from the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit — where an appeal of Arpaio's request would be heard.
|
|
Walter Dellinger III, an appellate lawyer who as acting solicitor general argued at the Supreme Court for the government of the United States from 1996 to 1997, told CNBC, "I know of none," when asked whether he had heard of any prior case in which the high court considered a request to be heard on appeal in sealed documents.
|
|
Google's objection was to be expected, because, under prior case law, Google cannot be compelled to reveal the identity of an anonymous poster unless and until Elliott can prove that the posts were libelous, said Paul Levy, an attorney with Public Citizen who has helped establish precedent for when a court can compel an internet provider to identify an anonymous user.
|
|
The Court held that it was admissible. The second decision involved depositions taken in a prior case, in an "inferior court" in which the "present defendant" (presumably Stammers) was also a party. The court held that the deposition from the prior case could not be used as evidence in the case at hand. The court noted that the depositions had not been read into evidence in the prior case.
|
|
The Standard Oil case resulted in the breakup of Standard Oil into 34 separate companies. Many of these have since recombined, particularly into ExxonMobil. While some scholars have agreed with Justice Harlan's characterization of prior case law, others have agreed with William Howard Taft, who concluded that despite its different verbal formulation, Standard Oil's "rule of reason" was entirely consistent with prior case law.
|
|
The case and subsequent judgment affirmed principles from a prior case, Catnic Components Ltd. v. Hill & Smith Ltd. The issue was whether the claims of a European patent granted to Kirin-Amgen, Inc. were infringed by Transkaryotic Therapies Inc.
|
|
Prior case law had established two relevant categories of speech that were outside the protection of the First Amendment. In Miller v. California, ,Miller v. California, the Court had held that the First Amendment allowed the government to restrict obscenity.
|
|
Flowers, distinguishing the prior case on the basis that the government in Dusenbery did not know that its method of notice had failed before the taking occurred. Justice Clarence Thomas, in dissent, believed the Court was instead undermining Dusenbery, which he argued implicitly dictated a result contrary to the majority's decision.
|
|
Haley was the second African- American to receive a Law degree from the University of Arkansas. He worked with attorney and future Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall on the landmark case Brown v. Topeka, Kansas Board of Education case challenging the "separate but equal" in the prior case of Plessy v. Ferguson.
|
|
In September 2019, the true-crime/supernatural podcast, "Let's Get Haunted" discussed the Jamison disappearance in episode 17: "The Jamison Family Disappearance." The hosts of "Let's Get Haunted" had obtained court records for prior history on the family and had spoken to a person who was directly involved with a prior case.
|
|
L. Rev. 1275, 1306 (2000). Subpoenas based on the information in those documents yielded the documents used in a prosecution later of Ohio businessman Jack Payner. Lewis Powell wrote for the majority that prior case law gave Payner no reasonable expectation of privacy in the documents used to build the case against him.
|
|
The Courts' reasoning was based heavily on the precedent from prior case law: "The Court's prior cases are instructive":Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. at 526. Duncan v. LouisianaDuncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145, at 155-156, 88 S. Ct. 1444 at 1450-1451, 20 L. Ed. 2d 491, 1968 U.S. LEXIS 1631 (1968).
|
|
In a later interview van Gucht refined his opinion, adding that 70% of the population (approximately 8 million persons) could become infected. By 4 March 10 new cases were confirmed, making a total of 23. Nine of the new infected individuals had recently returned from Italy. The other patient had had contact with a prior case.
|
|
Stiffel Co., 376 U.S. 225, 232 (1964) and Kellogg Co. v. National Biscuit Co., 305 U.S. 111, 122 (1938) as support. For a number of years, lower courts wrestled with how to reconcile the Inwood definition with prior case law, with some ignoring it altogether and others blending the Inwood test with other case law. In Qualitex Co. v.
|
|
"Once [she] stopped explicitly criticizing the President's policies and expressed a desire that he be assassinated, she crossed the line." Even if it were a matter of public concern, he continued, the constable had a strong interest, recognized in prior case law, in protecting its public image, in particular since his office was a law enforcement agency.Rankin, 394 et seq., Scalia, J., dissenting.
|
|
The principle of strict and absolute duties of loyalty laid down in Keech was a decisive break with prior case law, seen in Holt v Holt,(1670) 1 Ch. Cas. 190 Rushworth’s Case,(1676) 2 Freem. 13 and Walley v Walley.(1687) 1 Vern 484 The influence of Keech has reached beyond the duties of trustees, into the fiduciary duties of company directors.
|
|
This led one court to recently confine the doctrine to machines while admitting that "common sense and fair play" would extend this duty to all inventions.See Sanofi-Aventis Canada Inc. v. Apotex Inc. 2009 FC 676 Some authors such as Professor Vaver argue that this revisionism seems wrong given prior case law and the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Consolboard Inc. v.
|
|
The report of both decisions are quite short by today's standards; they are one sentence apiece. Thus, both appear on a single page, and both share the same citation. In the same way that it is not clear what Court issued these decisions, it is not clear what "inferior court" handled the prior case in which the deposition was taken.
|
|
Even though A-1 Contractors was in a consensual relationship with the Tribe as a subcontractor for a Tribally-owned company, Fredericks was not a party to this contract. The court differentiates the accident from prior case law where the "consensual relationship" exception applied, such as Williams v. Lee; These cases typically involve sales taxes or taxes for doing business on the reservation.520 U.S. at 457.
|
|
The stalker drives off, but not before Avi notes his license plate number. Ray, going against instructions from Stu and Lee, warns Ashley about her stalker. Ashley, who knows Ray from a prior case, tries to seduce him before experiencing a seizure. Ray learns from his brother Terry, a former boxer now afflicted with Parkinson's disease, that his other brother, Bunchy, has suffered a relapse.
|
|
Justice Stevens wrote the decision of the Court, which was unanimous. Stevens began by stating a prior case bound the Court to a different interpretation of the phrase "floods or flood waters" than the Ninth Circuit. In James v. United States (1986), the Court found the phrase "floods or flood waters" encompassed waters released for flood control purposes when reservoired waters are at flood stage.
|
|
The threats are the same as in the prior case, where East is squeezed. But the position is characteristic of a backwash squeeze: West is squeezed in three suits; one of the threats is against West's ability to lead trump effectively; there is no structural two-card menace consisting of an entry and a threat card; West is squeezed as South ruffs a card in the fourth suit.
|
|
In common law jurisdictions, courts interpret law; this includes constitutions, statutes, and regulations. They also make law (but in a limited sense, limited to the facts of particular cases) based upon prior case law in areas where the legislature has not made law. For instance, the tort of negligence is not derived from statute law in most common law jurisdictions. The term common law refers to this kind of law.
|
|
" A panel of the Federal Circuit does not have the authority to overrule prior Federal Circuit law. For the court to overrule its prior case law, it must operate en banc.See Phillip M. Kannan, The Precedential Force of Panel Law, 76 755 (1993). Under the interpanel doctrine, "No panel can overrule the precedent established by any panel in the same circuit; all panels are bound by prior panel decisions in the same circuit.
|
|
Knick petitioned the Supreme Court for writ of certiorari. Knick's petition pointed out that there was a split in how Williamson County was applied in the Circuit Courts. The Third Circuit's decision agreed with the Sixth, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits in prior case law, but was in conflict with the First, Fourth, and Seventh Circuits. Additionally, the petition referred to Justice John Roberts' denial for writ of certiorari in Arrigoni Enterprises, LLC v.
|
|
Murphy then appealed to the Tenth Circuit, which reversed the decision of the District Court. The Tenth Circuit found no prior court had reviewed whether Congress disestablished the Muscogee reservation under the tests of Solem v. Bartlett (1984), a prior case that established that only Congress has the power to disestablish native reservations. On its own analysis of all laws passed by Congress related to the tribal reservation and Oklahoma's statehood, found no explicit statement of disestablishment.
|
|
Bobby believes Pintero is behind the smear campaign as revenge for a prior case, with help from Brill, a secretive contact of Rachel's. Bobby sets up a meet with Brill, to which the NSA sends an impostor, but the real Brill rescues Bobby. Brill explains that his pursuers are NSA agents and rids him of tracking devices hidden in his clothing. With Bobby and Brill in hiding, the NSA agents kill Rachel and frame Bobby for the murder.
|
|
At the FBI, Dennis is crushed by the two agents' deaths in Chicago and the loss of "Harvest", while Stan asks about sketches of others from this escape and reviews the files from a prior case with a similar escape and the sketches from another similar escape. Elizabeth reminds Philip that the summit starts in a week. Erica continues working with "Stephanie" on how to create art. After "Stephanie's" shift, Elizabeth visits Philip at the travel agency and learns about the layoffs there.
|
|
Users can search and read published opinions of US state appellate and supreme court cases since 1950, US federal district, appellate, tax, and bankruptcy courts since 1923 and US Supreme Court cases since 1791. Google Scholar embeds clickable citation links within the case and the How Cited tab allows lawyers to research prior case law and the subsequent citations to the court decision. The Google Scholar Legal Content Star Paginator extension inserts Westlaw and LexisNexis style page numbers in line with the text of the case.
|
|
IRAC is an Abbreviation of Issue, Rule, Analysis (or some say Application), Conclusion. When a potential client has an interview with an attorney and tells of the legal problem, the attorney, or office paralegal, will review prior case law to find out if the client does indeed have a problem that has legal remedy. The formation of each case brief follows the same pattern: Facts, Issue, Rule, Analysis, Impact. A case brief may also include a dissent or concurrence if there is either in the particular case.
|
|
Hilda Ellis Davidson further links accounts of the jötunn Þjazi's eyes flung into the heavens by Odin and the frozen toe of Aurvandil tossed into the sky by the god Thor, the eyes in the prior case becoming stars and the toe in the latter case becoming a star known as "Aurvandil's Toe". Davidson comments that "these myths are evidently connected with names of constellations, but the strange reference to a frozen toe suggests that there is some connexion with the creation legend of the giant that emerged from the ice".Davidson (1990:199–200).
|
|
The Supreme Court's own few precedents, however, tended to paint with a broader brush instead of resorting to the foregoing factor analysis. The Supreme Court stated that “the distilled essence” of the prior case law came from Judge Learned Hand, who ruled in 1948 that "[t]he [patent] monopolist cannot prevent those to whom he sells from...reconditioning articles worn by use, unless they in fact make a new article".See Aro I, 365 U.S. at 343. Accordingly, the Court rejected the factor analysis approach of lower courts to repair and reconstruction.
|
|
This track represented a dual turning point, since it was the first time Case had had a track chart, and prior, Case had only used vocal samples, and it was the first time he had worked with a live vocalist in his studio. Ed Case achieved a greater level of mainstream pop fame with his remix of Gorillaz' "Clint Eastwood". He selected that track to remix because the original was 'quite slow', and he thought that his best contribution could be made in the form of a more energetic version, featuring MC Sweetie Irie.
|
|
China Agritech moved to dismiss Resh's complaint because the two year limitations period set by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 had already passed. The district court granted China Agritech's motion to dismiss. According to the District Court, under the Supreme Court's prior case, American Pipe & Construction v. Utah, individual claims against the company were tolled during the two class actions filed in 2011 and 2012, but the American Pipe did not reach the issue of whether the tolling rule also applied to a new class action based on a "substantially identical" class.
|
|
Both the coroner and Detective Bailey rule his death a suicide due to apparent evidence of alcohol and drugs nearby his body and in his bloodstream, but neither Donald nor Paul's mother are convinced of this. Phyllis Hale believes Paul was murdered. Strachey is determined to find out the truth about Paul's death. On the way to work the next morning, Strachey accosts someone who he believes is breaking into his office, but it turns out to be Kenny Kwon, who was fired during a confrontation between Strachey and his boss Nathan Zenck during a prior case.
|
|
Evans.. Justice Stewart further stated in his opinion: The majority reasoned that a foreign nation is entitled to pursue damages when it its business or property has suffered damages caused by another entities antitrust violations. When a foreign nation conducts business in U.S. commercial markets, it can be victimized by anti-competitive practices in the same manner as a domestic U.S. State of private person. The issue of person-hood for a sovereign government was supported by prior case law, with Justice Stewart referring to two specific cases to support the majority argument. Both the United States v.
|
|
These scholars argue that much language in Trans-Missouri Freight was dicta, and also emphasized the Court's decision in United States v. Joint Traffic Association, 171 U.S. 505 (1898), in which the Court announced that "ordinary contracts and combinations" did not offend the Sherman Act, because they restrained only trade "indirectly". Indeed, in his 1912 book on antitrust law, Taft reported that no critic of Standard Oil could succeed in Taft's challenge: to articulate one scenario in which the rule of reason would produce a result different from that produced under prior case law. In 1911, the Supreme Court announced United States v.
|
|
McSherry couldn't recall a prior case where an individual asserted a domain name was libelous. Jack Bremer of The First Post wrote that the attempt by Beck's lawyers arguing the domain name of the website was itself defamatory had likely never occurred before in the field of information technology law. Media commentators, including Paul Schmelzer of the Minnesota Independent, Andy Carvin of National Public Radio, and Andrew Allemann of Domain Name Wire, considered Randazza's legal brief entertainingly written. Writing for Bostonist, Rick Sawyer called Randazza's legal brief very funny and considered him among the uproariously amusing wordsmiths in North Shore, Massachusetts.
|
|
A new criminal code, passed in 1872, retained the prior restrictions on sodomy without substantial change, but replaced common-law assumptions regarding "crimes against nature" with more explicit language regarding sodomy. Successful challenges to convictions for sodomy included People v. Hickey (1895), in which the Supreme Court struck down a sodomy conviction because the trial court did not inform the jury that an assault to commit sodomy could only be considered a simple assault, and People v. Boyle (1897), in which a court ruled that fellatio did not constitute a "crime against nature" (as per a prior case in Texas).
|
|
Petitioner's existing power plants have cooling water intake structures that threaten freshwater aquatic life by compression against intake screens (impingement) or suctioning organisms into the cooling system (entrainment). They challenge the Second Circuit decision in Riverkeeper v. EPA 2007 (see prior case above) that CBA cannot be used in interpretation of the Clean Water Act statute to determine NPS and BAT for existing power plants. Respondents support the Second Circuit's finding that the EPA's decision of site-specific cost–benefit variance provision and the use of CBA to determine NPS and BAT for existing facilities is not within the statute and remand the regulations to the agency for clarification.
|
|
Constand filed a civil claim in March 2005, with 13 women as potential witnesses if the case went to court. Cosby settled out of court for an undisclosed amount in November 2006. In a July 2005 Philadelphia Daily News interview, Beth Ferrier, one of the anonymous "Jane Doe" witnesses in the Constand case, alleged that in 1984 Cosby drugged her coffee and she awoke with her clothes partially removed. After learning that charges were not pursued in the case, California lawyer Tamara Lucier Green, the only publicly-named woman in the prior case, came forward with allegations in February 2005 that Cosby had drugged and assaulted her in the 1970s.
|
|
Justice Brennan wrote the dissenting opinion which was joined by Justice Marshall and which Justice White concurred in part. Justice Brennan pointed out that the majority's opinion was inconsistent with the Court's prior case law and was unduly restrictive in its construction of the Bill of Rights. Justice Brennan pointed out that the majority misread the precedence in Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.. which they believed supported the idea that the existence of a state remedy (such as a cause of action for defamation) would be relevant to the determination whether there is a separate cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 citing Monroe v. Pape.
|
|
In an opinion by Justice Marshall, the Court came to three key findings: Material difference is a requirement for a disposition under §1001. Justice Marshall cited Treasury Regulation §1.1001-1 (), which required that an exchange of materially different properties constitutes a realization under the Tax Code. Congress delegated to the Commissioner the authority to make rules and regulations to enforce the Internal Revenue Code. Because Title 26 of the Code of Federal Regulations represents the Commissioner's interpretation of the Code, the Court deferred to the Commissioner's judgment, holding that the regulation was a reasonable interpretation of the Code and consonant with prior case law.
|
|
He often retells stories to Jack of the old days with his former partner Frank Savage (Gary Cole), with whom he had a close buddy-cop relationship. These stories sometimes seep in, and Jack sometimes finds use of them to save lives of victims. He is reckless and unpredictable, and does not hesitate to use his handgun for any trivial matter, such as "using his service revolver to open a mayonnaise jar" and shooting a radio because of the loud noise, or even running through a $300 window to stop a dine and dasher. His overzealousness on a prior case cost him any chance of ever being promoted past detective.
|
|
Constand filed a civil claim in March 2005, with thirteen women as potential witnesses if the case went to court. Cosby settled out of court for an undisclosed amount in November 2006. In a July 2005 Philadelphia Daily News interview, Beth Ferrier, one of the anonymous "Jane Doe" witnesses in the Constand case, alleged that in 1984 Cosby drugged her coffee and she awoke with her clothes partially removed. After learning that charges were not pursued in the case, Green, the only publicly named woman in the prior case, came forward with allegations in February 2005 that Cosby had drugged and assaulted her in the 1970s.
|
|
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. confirmed to the Internet news site golem.de that the new injunction was related to the prior case against the Wikimedia Foundation and was issued on behalf of the same plaintiffs. Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. was reported as intending to fight the injunction, arguing that no valid case was presented and the freedom of the press must be defended.golem.de: "Wikipedia.de derzeit abgeschaltet", by Andreas Donath, 2006-01-19 (in German) As Müller-Maguhn, one of the spokespersons of the Chaos Computer Club, was deeply involved in the case on the side of the plaintiffs, some media reported this as a case of Chaos Computer Club against Wikipedia.
|
|
The trial judge found both aggravating factors beyond a reasonable doubt, that the mitigating factors were not sufficiently substantial to call for leniency, and then imposed a death sentence. The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence. With respect to the finding that the murder was committed in an especially heinous, cruel, or depraved manner, the court observed that under its prior case law, the murder was cruel in light of the evidence that Powell had some uncertainty as to his ultimate fate, and the murder was depraved in light of the evidence that Walton had relished the killing. Reviewing the death sentence independently, it found that the death sentence was appropriate on these facts.
|
|
In January 2004, Andrea Constand, a former Temple University employee, accused Cosby of drugging and fondling her; however, in February 2005, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania's District Attorney said there would be no charges due to insufficient credible and admissible evidence. Constand then filed a civil claim in March 2005, with thirteen women as potential witnesses if the case went to court. Cosby settled out of court for an undisclosed amount in November 2006. After learning that charges were not pursued in the Constand case, California lawyer Tamara Lucier Green, the only publicly named woman in the prior case, came forward with allegations in February 2005 that Cosby had drugged and assaulted her in the 1970s.
|
|
The majority judgement began by briefly discussing the nature of judicial appeals as statutory. They mentioned four types of appeal discussed in prior case law.at [20], citing Builders Licensing Board v Sperway Constructions (Syd) Pty Ltd (1976) 135 CLR 616 at 619-622 They noted the meaning of the word 'rehearing' in the Supreme Court Act (NSW) as being; a proceeding on the basis of the record, with fresh evidence only to be admitted exceptionally.214 CLR 118, at para [22] Further describing this generic type of appeal, the court said of its requirements:214 CLR 118, at para [23] > 'On the one hand, the appellate court is obliged to "give the judgment which > in its opinion ought to have been given in the first instance".
|
|
Bi-telecentric lens with 208mm diameter and C mount Bi-telecentric lens Comparison of a conventional lens (1), object-space telecentric lens (2), image-space telecentric lens (3) and bi-telecentric lens (4) A telecentric lens is a compound lens that has its entrance or exit pupil at infinity; in the prior case, this produces an orthographic view of the subject. This means that the chief rays (oblique rays that pass through the center of the aperture stop) are parallel to the optical axis in front of or behind the system, respectively. The simplest way to make a lens telecentric is to put the aperture stop at one of the lens's focal points. An entrance pupil at infinity makes the lens object-space telecentric.
|
|
"Neutrality by Agreement: Portugal and the British Alliance in World War II." American University International Law Review 14, no. 1 (1998): 185-199 At the outbreak of World War II, to the nearly 400 Jews that were living in Portugal an additional 650 Jewish refugees from Central Europe were granted a quasi-resident status. However, under threat of military action from the Nazis Salazar issued orders on November 11, 1939, that consuls were not to issue Portuguese visas to "foreigners of indefinite or contested nationality; the stateless; or Jews expelled from their countries of origin". This order was followed only six months later by one stating that "under no circumstances" were visas to be issued without prior case-by-case approval from Lisbon.
|
|
In practice, it is largely reserved for heads of power that deal with federal things, persons, or undertakings, or if, in the past, its application has been considered absolutely indispensable or necessary to achieve the purpose for which exclusive legislative jurisdiction was conferred, as discerned from the constitutional division of powers as a whole, or what is absolutely indispensable or necessary to enable an undertaking to carry out its mandate in what makes it specifically of one jurisdiction or the other.Canadian Western, para. 77 While in theory, a consideration of interjurisdictional immunity is apt for consideration after the pith and substance analysis, in practice, the absence of prior case law favouring its application to the subject matter at hand will generally justify a court proceeding directly to the consideration of federal paramountcy.Canadian Western, par.
|
|
Canadian Western Bank, at par. 26 Two aspects of the law or of the impugned provision are analyzed: the purpose of the enacting body in adopting it, and the legal effect of the law or provision.Canadian Western Bank, at par. 27 In this case, the validity of the two Acts was not contested and a full pith and substance analysis was not required.SCC, par. 48 #At the end of a pith and substance analysis, a court should generally consider interjurisdictional immunity only if there is "prior case law favouring its application to the subject matter at hand".Canadian Western Bank, at par. 78 The doctrine "is of limited application and should in general be reserved for situations already covered by precedent".Canadian Western Bank, at par. 77 In view of Ordon v.
|
|
On May 23, 2018, the parents of victims Jaime Guttenberg and Alex Schachter sued firearm manufacturer American Outdoor Brands Corporation, formerly known as Smith & Wesson, the manufacturer of the rifle used by Cruz, and distributor Sunrise Tactical Supply, the retailer who sold Cruz the rifle, claiming damages due to "the defendant's complicity in the entirely foreseeable, deadly use of the assault-style weapons that they place on the market." Fifteen survivors sued the county, sheriff and school officials for failing to protect them contending that the government's inadequate response to the shooting violated their Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. This lawsuit was dismissed in December 2018, with the judge citing prior case law in ruling that the government did not have a duty to protect the defendants from the actions of the shooter.
|
|
324 U.S. at 503. After considering precedents governing rights to a head of water when the tailrace was in a navigable stream or a non-navigable stream, the Court concluded that no prior case had dealt with precisely the situation (present here) where the top of the tailrace was at a non-navigable stream and its base was at a navigable stream. Accordingly, there was no recognized legal right to have water flow away from a tailrace into a navigable stream. The Court therefore ruled: > We hold that claimant's interest or advantage in the high water level of the > St. Croix River as a run-off for tail waters to maintain its power head is > not a right protected by law, and that the award below based exclusively on > the loss in value thereof must be reversed.
|
|
However, a panel of judges for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that Hernández Güereca had 5th Amendment rights, and that these rights had been violated when Mesa killed him. The panel further said that Mesa could not claim qualified immunity for his actions, as "no reasonable officer would have understood Agent Mesa's alleged conduct to be lawful." There was then a rehearing by the full panel en banc in the Fifth Circuit, which reversed the prior panel and unanimously reaffirmed the District Court's dismissal of the case, saying that regardless of whether Hernández Güereca had 5th Amendment rights or not, Mesa was entitled to qualified immunity because he could not have been aware that his actions would not qualify for immunity under the circumstances, since there had not been prior case law to settle the issue.
|
|
Thus, a gas company had no authority to unilaterally change a rate in a contract by filing a new rate schedule with the FPC. The opinion also explained that the NGA was different from the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA) then in effect, which required transportation companies to use the same rate schedule for all customers and did not authorize special rates to be set by contract with individual customers as the large number of customers engaged in interstate commerce did not permit an administrative agency to review contracts with special rates. In comparison, there were relatively few gas companies and customers, and the NGA’s authorization to set rates using contracts recognized that dedicated infrastructure and capacity with individualized costs might be required for a gas company to serve a customer. Based on this difference, the Court then distinguished the prior case of Armour Packing Co. v.
|
|
Harris v Evans was a 1998 appeal civil court case in the United Kingdom between John Terence George Harris, a bungee jump operator, and Glynne Evans, an inspector of the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), and the Health and Safety Executive itself. The appeal was against a prior case in which the respondent, Harris, argued that the appellants made "negligently excessive requirements" of their business. The case was presided over by the Vice Chancellor Sir Richard Scott, Lord Justice Auld and Lord Justice Schiemann and involved the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. Evans had given advice to local authorities on the safety requirements of a mobile crane and other equipment used by Harris in connection with their bungee jump business which led to the local authorities either banning Harris from offering bungee jump services or serving prohibition notices under the 1974 Act.
|
|
Markman has argued against an increased role by the judiciary in matters of public policy and suggested that unless citizens engage in a constitutional debate, public matters will be increasingly decided by judges. In 2008, Markman wrote a piece for the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy saying, "[T]he Michigan Supreme Court has set as its priority the proper exercise of the 'judicial power,' to read the law evenhandedly and give it meaning by assessing its words, its grammar and syntax, its context, and its legislative purpose. The court's dominant premise has been on 'getting the law right'—moving toward the best and most faithful interpretation of the law—rather than reflexively acquiescing in prior case law that essentially reflected little more than the personal preferences of predecessor justices." In April 2010, Markman published an essay in Hillsdale College's monthly publication, Imprimis, in which he argued against a living constitution with expanded input from judicial governance.
|
|
The Court reviewed the prior case law concerning repair and reconstruction, with a principal focus on its own rather than lower court opinions. It rejected the analysis of those lower courts using a many- factor, balancing test and instead held the proper test to be this: > The decisions of this Court require the conclusion that reconstruction of a > patented entity, unpatented elements, is limited to such a true > reconstruction of the entity as to "in fact make a new article," after the > entity, viewed as a whole, has become spent. In order to call the monopoly, > conferred by the patent grant, into play for a second time, it must, indeed, > be a second creation of the patented entity. …Mere replacement of individual > unpatented parts, one at a time, whether of the same part repeatedly or > different parts successively, is no more than the lawful right of the owner > to repair his property.
|
|
The case is second one against Google in less than 12 months. The FTC does not have the authority to fine a company under Section 5 of the FTC Act, but it can fine a company that violates a consent order with the commission. The FTC took that power into account and built on its prior case against the company (Google I). The arguments are in some respects different than in other similar cases addressing consumer privacy, and the complaint (Google II Complaint) and proposed order provide significant insight into the reasoning of the FTC, which is very valuable information for companies that collect or use personal information and prefer to reduce the risk of government action." Additionally, the case also highlighted the impact that this case may have caused in the international community: "the FTC action against the world's most popular search engine provides the U.S. government with an opportunity to show the rest of the world, and especially the European Union and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation member economies, that it cares about privacy and is serious about enforcement.
|
|