Sentences with phrase «federal court judge yesterday»

Not exact matches

The brazen Bronx pol grinned like a Cheshire cat as he sauntered out of Manhattan federal court yesterday after the judge declared a mistrial when jurors said they were hopelessly deadlocked on a slate of charges that many saw as a slam dunk.

Manhattan federal court Judge John Sprizzo ranted in court yesterday at a lawyer who'd...

Meanwhile, a decision yesterday from a three - judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Cook v. Gates, is drawing interest for its dismissal of a constitutional challenge to the federal government's controversial «Don't Ask, Don't Tell,» policy on gays in the military.

«Judges Press C.I.A. Lawyer Over Withheld Documents»: The New York Times today contains an article that begins, «A federal appeals court panel in Manhattan questioned a lawyer for the federal government yesterday as to whether the Central Intelligence Agency had a legitimate national security interest in refusing to confirm or deny the existence of documents authorizing it to detain and interrogate terrorism suspects overseas.»

In re: ZTE (USA) Inc., 18 - 113 — Yesterday in an opinion by Judge LINN, the Federal Circuit granted ZTE's petition for a writ of mandamus, vacating a district court's order denying ZTE's motion to dismiss for improper venue and remanding.

As detailed in this Los Angeles Times piece, headlined «To some jurists, high court ruling brings vindication,» federal sentencing judges long troubled by the rigidity and severity of the federal guidelines are sure to celebrate the Supreme Court's work yesterday in Gall and Kimbrcourt ruling brings vindication,» federal sentencing judges long troubled by the rigidity and severity of the federal guidelines are sure to celebrate the Supreme Court's work yesterday in Gall and KimbrCourt's work yesterday in Gall and Kimbrough.

«[T] he weight of authority suggests that accurate news reporting — even when it is likely to have an adverse impact on the subjects of the report — usually does not give rise to an action for intentional infliction of emotional distress»: Yesterday, a unanimous three - judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued a decision affirming a federal district court's dismissal of claims for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress asserted by two former undercover police officers against a television station in Albuquerque that had revealed their identities and their undercover status in the context of a televised report about their suspected involvement in an alleged incident of sexual assCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued a decision affirming a federal district court's dismissal of claims for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress asserted by two former undercover police officers against a television station in Albuquerque that had revealed their identities and their undercover status in the context of a televised report about their suspected involvement in an alleged incident of sexual asscourt's dismissal of claims for invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress asserted by two former undercover police officers against a television station in Albuquerque that had revealed their identities and their undercover status in the context of a televised report about their suspected involvement in an alleged incident of sexual assault.