Sentences with phrase «do federal appellate courts»

Bayer AG v. Paul, 544 U.S. 919 (2005)(Do federal appellate courts have jurisdiction to review remand orders where the reasons for remand are different from those identified in the motion to remand?)

Not exact matches

«Executive orders don't hold us back,» de Blasio told the crowd gathered at Battery Park, referring to Trump's order on immigration, which has since been struck down by a federal appellate court.

Washington — Parents who win special - education disputes with school districts can not be awarded attorneys» fees if their cases do not go to court, a federal appellate court has ruled.

These hearings were far more extensive because the commission did not want to repeat the embarrassment of being told by a federal appellate court that it had failed to develop an adequate record, and because there was now a much larger and better funded community of environmental activists intervening to oppose the plant.

So, while the New York Times story does have a dog - bites - man feel to it, it forebodes a much bigger story in the making, given the direction of the five men in the majority in Citizens United and the right - wing domination of the federal appellate court.

In reality, as the majority of legal representatives know, appellate practice typically is based in federal and state courts of appeal and typically has little to do with Supreme Court practice.

We do the case summaries themselves, so we write case summaries for all the federal appellate courts, Supreme Court, all the circuits.

I did start my own firm after all, which lead to me becoming an offshore renewables legal expert and arguing cases before federal appellate courts and juries...» More here.

And we have done it in virtually every forum, including mediations and arbitrations, administrative agencies, and federal and state trial and appellate courts from Maryland to Alaska.

In doing so, I offer a comprehensive defense practice that encompasses both state and federal courts from the municipal level to the appellate level.

In a December 2016 article for Green Bag, Judge Posner stated that among the reforms he would implement at federal appellate courts, «the first thing to do is burn all copies of the Bluebook, in its latest edition 560 pages of rubbish».

In truth, as many legal representatives understand, appellate practice generally is based in federal and state courts of appeal and frequently has little to do with Supreme Court practice.

And the related issue in Highmark v. Allcare Health Management Systems has to do with the standard of review the appellate court, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, must apply when reviewing the district court's decision to grant or deny the award of court, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, must apply when reviewing the district court's decision to grant or deny the award of Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, must apply when reviewing the district court's decision to grant or deny the award of court's decision to grant or deny the award of fees.

The Court of Review is an appellate court, and like other Article III appellate courts, it has the power to bind both lower courts (in this case, the FISC) and later Court of Review panels.22 The Court of Review probably has the same discretion as federal courts of appeals to designate opinions as precedential and non-precedential; at least, no statutory provision declares otherwise.23 The two public Court of Review opinions are published in redacted form in the Federal Reporter.24 As with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedenCourt of Review is an appellate court, and like other Article III appellate courts, it has the power to bind both lower courts (in this case, the FISC) and later Court of Review panels.22 The Court of Review probably has the same discretion as federal courts of appeals to designate opinions as precedential and non-precedential; at least, no statutory provision declares otherwise.23 The two public Court of Review opinions are published in redacted form in the Federal Reporter.24 As with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedencourt, and like other Article III appellate courts, it has the power to bind both lower courts (in this case, the FISC) and later Court of Review panels.22 The Court of Review probably has the same discretion as federal courts of appeals to designate opinions as precedential and non-precedential; at least, no statutory provision declares otherwise.23 The two public Court of Review opinions are published in redacted form in the Federal Reporter.24 As with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedenCourt of Review panels.22 The Court of Review probably has the same discretion as federal courts of appeals to designate opinions as precedential and non-precedential; at least, no statutory provision declares otherwise.23 The two public Court of Review opinions are published in redacted form in the Federal Reporter.24 As with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedenCourt of Review probably has the same discretion as federal courts of appeals to designate opinions as precedential and non-precedential; at least, no statutory provision declares otherwise.23 The two public Court of Review opinions are published in redacted form in the Federal Reporter.24 As with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedfederal courts of appeals to designate opinions as precedential and non-precedential; at least, no statutory provision declares otherwise.23 The two public Court of Review opinions are published in redacted form in the Federal Reporter.24 As with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedenCourt of Review opinions are published in redacted form in the Federal Reporter.24 As with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedFederal Reporter.24 As with the published case of the FISC sitting en banc, these published Court of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedenCourt of Review cases are certainly precedential.25 We do not know the volume, if any, of secret non-precedential Court of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedenCourt of Review opinions, or whether there are non-public Court of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedenCourt of Review opinions that are nonetheless treated as precedential.

(With that decision, the Eleventh Circuit becomes the second federal appellate court to answer that question in the affirmative, with the Fifth Circuit having done so in 2013).

Where do you stand on the question of allowing citation to «unpublished» opinions; do you believe that federal appellate court panels should be able to designate some of their rulings as «non-precedential» upon issuance, or should the precedential value of an opinion be left to later panels to determine; and why?

While today you don't have to travel hundreds of miles by dogsled to hear cases as your predecessor judges based in Alaska once did, you probably now have the most grueling commute of any federal appellate judge to arrive at the locations where your court regularly hears oral arguments.

Do you believe that federal appellate court panels should be able to designate some of their rulings as «non-precedential» upon issuance, or should the precedential value of an opinion be left to later panels to determine; and why?

And how do you respond to those who say that the best way to remedy the problems associated with the Ninth Circuit's large size is to reorder the size and composition of all the federal appellate courts, a remedy that would increase the number of judges serving on, and the geographical boundaries of, the First Circuit?

How do I handle requests for such references?Thank you so much for your help!CherylCHERYL M. EARLE3407 Old Dobbin Road, Montgomery, Alabama 36116 - 1903Home Phone: [phone] Cell Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone] E-mail: [email protected] position managing legal discovery and document review with opportunity to assist attorneys with civil litigationBAR ADMISSIONAlabama State Bar, 1999LAW - RELATED EXPERIENCELaw Firm, AlabamaResearch Attorney for Special Projects, Mass Torts Department, November 2001 — February 2008 • Managed Multi-District Litigation (MDL) Document Depository (September 2002 to February 2008) o Reviewed more than 1 million pages of evidentiary documents for litigation purposes and for inclusion in electronic databaseso Coordinated document review assignments with attorneys at local depository and at other sites across the USo Retrieved, reviewed and coded documents in Concordance and Summation legal databaseso Prepared memoranda and spreadsheets providing detailed analysis of discovery materials • Aided attorneys and support staff with processing and preparation of personal injury claims and litigationo Conducted legal research and drafted pleadingso Conducted supplementary online research for additional documents and information pertinent to litigationo Assisted with preparation of correspondence to clients and referring attorneyso Contacted clients for additional information needed in case preparation, litigation, and potential settlementso Prepared and input case intakes and referrals into databaseLaw School, AlabamaStudent Intern, Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program (ADAP), August 1996 — June 1997 • Participated in law school clinical program under third - year law student practice rule (as authorized by Alabama Supreme Court) o Assisted attorneys and advocates in cases involving mentally ill patients confined to state mental health facilitieso Interviewed clients in person (at state facilities) and over the phoneo Worked with clients, attorneys, and social workers to investigate and resolve issues concerning involuntary confinement and treatmento Aided in legal research on an appellate brief submitted to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (ruling granted in favor of our client) Faculty Research Assistant for Library Services, Bounds Law Library, March 1996 — June 1997 • Prepared research and teaching materials for law school faculty; worked 20 hours per week while matriculating 10 - 15 hours per semester) o Investigated copyright issues related to procuring and reproducing texts for academic useo Conducted legal research using WESTLAW, LEXIS and the InternetADDITIONAL RELEVANT EXPERIENCEManufacturing Company (MC), Montgomery, AlabamaAdministrative Assistant and Cost Analyst, Materials Purchasing Department, April 1999 — September 2001 • Assisted materials buyers in negotiating and preparing commodities contracts between raw materials suppliers and MC for manufacturing plants in the US and Mexicoo Assisted Legal Department at MC's corporate headquarters with coordination and preparation of documents for litigationo Notified and educated suppliers about MC's freight - on - board policy and its corresponding Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) provisions; result was the reduction of freight claims for both the company and its supplierso Prepared contracts and purchase orders for raw materials and capital projects involving plant maintenanceo Solicited price quotations from current vendors and established Excel spreadsheet format which simplified quote submission process and allowed MC to track and compare usage volumes and costs over timeo Prepared and analyzed cost reports used by materials buyers and production planners in purchasing decisions, including cost reductions, materials consolidation, and selection of vendorso Acted as liaison between vendors and the Purchasing, Transportation and Accounting Departments on issues concerning inbound freight, commercial carriers, and payment terms for commodities, resulting in reductions in freight costs and greater payment discounts for raw materialso Established online databases and printed directories for the Purchasing Department, allowing buyers to have easier and faster access to current vendor informationo Completed Year 2000 (Y2K) compliance project, which involved data collection and communication with MC's past, present, and potential materials suppliers and service providersNot - For - Profit Organization, AlabamaAdministrative Assistant, Combined Federal Campaign, September 1998 — January 1999 • Aided Campaign Director with 1998 Federal Campaigns (CFCs) in City 1 and City 2, which together generated nearly $ 700,000 for more than 1,000 local, national and international charitieso Prepared weekly reports on donations using WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, Excel and dBase IVo Wrote script for Talent Showcase at City 1's 1998 CFC Kickoffo Assisted Director with merger of the City 1 and City 2 CFCs in 1999Regional Bank, AlabamaAdministrative Assistant, Year 2000 (Y2K) Department, March — June 1998 • Worked with Vice President of Corporate Projects on short - term project for the bank's Y2K Departmento Analyzed and processed data on Y2K readiness for all branches of Bank throughout the southeastern USo Organized meetings for personnel of Banko Communicated with vendors of computer hardware, software, and office equipment to request information on Y2K complianceo Prepared compliance files for Federal Reserve auditso Prepared in - house memoranda and reports using Microsoft Word and ExcelRecord / Music Promotion Company, AlabamaRecord Pool Co-Founder; Office Manager, September 1990 — December 1991 • Co-founded record pool to enhance promotion of music in Alabama and the southeastern USo Procured and distributed records from major and independent labels for club, radio and mobile disc jockeyso Coordinated jointly sponsored promotional events with record companies, radio stations and clubso Designed, wrote, and published bi-weekly reports and brochures to inform the music industry of the progress and popularity of music and performers in the region, with specific focus on the Alabama music sceneMajor University, AlabamaGraduate Research Assistant, AUM Department of Marketing, June 1989 — August 1990 • Worked 13 - 20 hours per week as a research assistant to Marketing faculty while carrying a full course load in the MBA programo Analyzed consumer surveys used in academic researcho Assisted Conference Chairperson with coordination for Atlantic Marketing Association (AMA) annual meeting (October 1989) o Co-authored five - year index and classification of AMA Proceedings (published Fall 1991) EDUCATIONLaw School, AlabamaJuris Doctor (JD), 1997 • Scholarshipso Seybourn H. Lynne Scholarship, 1996 - 97o Dexter C. Hobbs Memorial Scholarship, 1995 - 96o E. W. Godbey Memorial Scholarship, 1994 - 95 • Honorso Who's Who Among American Law School Students, 1996 - 94o Arthur Davis Shores Award, 1997 • Activitieso Frederick Douglass Moot Court Team Manager, 1996 - 97 Southern Regional Competition, Second Place National Competition, Eighth Placeo John A. Campbell Moot Court Competition, Spring 1996o Black Law Students Association Delegate, BLSA National Convention, 1997 Co-Chairperson, Public Relations Committee, 1996 - 97 Chairperson, Public Relations Committee, 1995 - 96 BLSA President's Award, 1996 and 1997o American Bar Association, 1996 - 97 Entertainment and Sports Industries Forum Intellectual Property Section Law Student Divisiono LAWS Student Group Leader, 1995 - 96Major University, AlabamaMaster of Business Administration (MBA), 1990Bachelor of Science in Business Administration (B.S.B.A.), 1988 (Major: Marketing — Advertising and Promotion Track) • Honorso Dean's List • Activitieso National Student Advertising Competition Team, 1988 - 90 Seventh District Competition: Third Place, 1990o Marketing Club, 1987 - 90 Vice President — Career Development, 1988 - 89o Public Relations / Advertising (PR / AD) Club, 1988 - 90 Charter Member, 1988 Active in fund - raising and membership driveso Theater Guild, 1988 - 90 Screening Committee, 1989REFERENCESAvailable upon request

A federal appellate court has ruled that although one section of a homeowner's insurance policy stated that it didn't cover mold loss, the homeowners may be covered for their loss, since another section of the policy didn't specifically state a mold exclusion.

With the ruling, the court becomes the third federal appellate court to reject a statement of policy issued in 2001 by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development that expands the definition of unearned fees to include charges that don't involve a third party.

Federal appellate court reverses lower court, determining that lower court did not properly evaluate a REALTOR ® association's arbitration process.

A federal appellate court has stayed a lower court's injunction which had stopped the Federal Trade Commission from administering and enforcing its rules («Rules») related to the Do Not Call Registry («Registry&rfederal appellate court has stayed a lower court's injunction which had stopped the Federal Trade Commission from administering and enforcing its rules («Rules») related to the Do Not Call Registry («Registry&rFederal Trade Commission from administering and enforcing its rules («Rules») related to the Do Not Call Registry («Registry»).

Federal appellate court reverses its earlier decision and determines that arbitrator's failure to disclose his minimal contact with prevailing party's attorney did not require vacating an arbitration award.

A federal appellate court has considered a trial court's ruling that Move, Inc., the operator of realtor.com, did not infringe a patent owned by the Real Estate Alliance, Ltd. («REAL»).