Sentences with phrase «appeals court decision holding»

It also noted the attorney, in a rebuttal, cited «a [then] recent federal appeals court decision holding that law firm ads showing space aliens and lawyers running at breakneck speeds did not violate ethics rules.»

Not exact matches

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said its ruling stemmed from a 2008 decision in which it held that Cablevision Systems Corp. could offer a remote digital video recording service without paying additional licensing fees to broadcasters because each playback transmission was made to a single subscriber using a single unique copy produced by that subscriber.

In Rosenberger v. the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia it reviewed a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit which had held that though the University (a state entity) could fund....

This became painfully clear in 1996 when the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of the Alaska Supreme Court's Swanner decision, which held that the state's interest in preventing discrimination against unmarried heterosexual couples is sufficiently great that it trumps the objections of landlords who believe they are forbidden by God to permit «fornication» on their property.

He held that the interested parties having indicated their interest, which although was dismissed by the court, «the court is not minded to take any pre-emptive step» capable of undermining the eventual decision of the Court of Appeal, which he said could possibly order them to be joined as parcourt, «the court is not minded to take any pre-emptive step» capable of undermining the eventual decision of the Court of Appeal, which he said could possibly order them to be joined as parcourt is not minded to take any pre-emptive step» capable of undermining the eventual decision of the Court of Appeal, which he said could possibly order them to be joined as parCourt of Appeal, which he said could possibly order them to be joined as parties.

Delivering the Judgment, the Human Rights Court presided over by Justice of the Court of Appeal sitting with additional responsibility as a High Court Judge, Justice Anthony Yeboah held that the decision by the Fire Service was discriminatory and a breach of the fundamental Human Rights of the two applicants in the matter.

However, the travel ban, which is currently on hold because of a decision by the federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, has other elected officials in the county, specifically Democrats, worried about Astorino's support for the ban and that it does in fact unfairly target Muslims.

In a unanimous decision delivered on behalf of the court by Mr Justice Ofoe, the Court of Appeal held that the High Court was justified in freeing Woyome because the state failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable dcourt by Mr Justice Ofoe, the Court of Appeal held that the High Court was justified in freeing Woyome because the state failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable dCourt of Appeal held that the High Court was justified in freeing Woyome because the state failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable dCourt was justified in freeing Woyome because the state failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

She was sacked, in fact, by Ed Balls on December 1st 2008 - a decision held to be unlawful in the court of appeal.

Making reference to the Courts Act of 1993 (Act 459), Mr Justice Ofoe said Section 31 (2) holds that «an appellate court, on hearing an appeal in a criminal case, shall allow the appeal if the appellate court considers (a) that the verdict or conviction or acquittal ought to be set aside on the ground that it is unreasonable or can not be supported having regard to the evidence, or (b) that the judgement in question ought to be set aside as a wrong decision on a question of law or fact, or (c) that there was a miscarriage of justice, and in any other case shall dismiss the appeal.»

A recent appeals court ruling in a case that grew out of PSEG Long Island's expansion of an electrical substation on Old Stone Highway in Amagansett, represents a mixed decision for East Hampton Town, which had sought to hold the utility provider to local zoning laws that would have required planning board review of the project.

FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler responded to the court ruling by holding out the possibility of appealing the decision: «We will consider all available options, including those for appeal, to ensure that these networks on which the Internet depends continue to provide a free and open platform for innovation and expression, and operate in the interest of all Americans.»

By a 2 - to - 1 vote, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the state agency's decision, holding that it «facially discriminates on the basis of religion.»

The Supreme Court decision on this appeal held that it was legitimate for the legislature to make overall fiscal decisions, but that the legislature must maintain an educational system that met constitutional requirements.

The Court of Appeal, like Treu, also could put its ruling on hold until the Supreme Court makes a final decision.

The decisions by the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that officials in the Blue Mountain School District in Schuylkill County and the Hermitage School District in Mercer County in northwestern Pennsylvania violated the First Amendment rights of two secondary school students.

In a more recent decision, however, a Federal Court of Appeals refined that definition, holding that consent is only given if the consumer provided their cellphone number at the time of the credit application.

O. Any final and definitive decision of an administrative law judge, or in the case such decision is appealed, a final and definitive judgment of an appellate court, issued in connection with any hearing held pursuant to this Chapter and the Administrative Procedure Act shall be considered a valid and final judgment that may be made executory by the commissioner in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure.

She noted the case is on hold pending receipt of the Appeals Court decision and scheduled the next hearing for October 7.

This is even more evident in a decision out of New Jersey last month where the appeals court held that if an individual outside the car is texting the driver and knows the driver will read the text immediately, the sender has taken a foreseeable risk and «knowingly engaged in distracting conduct» and could be held liable.

After the discussion and conclusion on standard of review, the court held that there was no reviewable error by the prothonotary and so the lower decisions would stand and the appeal dismissed.

Anne Posno of Lenczner Slaght Royce Smith Griffin LLP discussed Paxton v. Ramji, an Ontario Court of Appeal decision that held that there was no duty of care owed to a fetus.

The Court of Appeal backed the High Court decision, holding that the contract was inadequate to protect the interests of the purchasers, and that the firm did not provide enough relevant information, particularly regarding the payment structure of the project and the promoter's commission.

Taylor Wessing has been ordered to disclose information it held about parties involved in litigation, in a landmark Court of Appeal decision on legal professional privilege under the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA 1998).

This concern motivated the Ontario Court of Appeal in Eliopoulos Estate (discussed above) to hold that «impos [ing] a private law duty... would create an unreasonable and undesirable burden... that would interfere with sound decision - making in the realm of public health.»

BPCL Holdings Inc. v. Alberta is the first Alberta Court of Appeal decision to deal with these minimum housing standards.

For example, a German court of appeal held that the parties had concluded a new arbitration agreement by signing ICC Terms of Reference.800 Similarly, a decision by the English House of Lords stated that «[i] n the present case one is dealing with an ICC arbitration agreement.

In reversing the Divisional Court's decision, the Court of Appeal held that the trial judge properly applied a contextual analysis when considering all of the facts before him.

A recent Court of Appeal decision (Griffiths v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions) has held that employers should consider making reasonable adjustments to their sickness absence procedures if they put disabled people at a disadvantage.

The Court of Appeal reversed the trial judge's decision as to the result of the outcome, but the trial judge held that the cause of the litigation may have been the uncertainty of the donor's intention, but the object of that was uncertainty was his alleged inter vivos gift and not his will, and that accordingly the general rule had to prevail that costs should follow the event.

The courts held that an injunction could be granted where it was just and proportionate to do so and that a judge hearing an injunction application could not consider the merits of the planning decision as this was a matter for the appeal stage.

However, all of this changed last year when the Ontario Court of Appeal released its decision in Joseph v. Paramount Canada's Wonderland, 1 a case in which, under Ontario's new Limitations Act, the plaintiff's attorney failed to issue the statement of claim within the limitation period.2 The Court of Appeal unanimously eliminated any discretion that the court had to extend limitation periods based on «special circumstances» and held, subject to only a few exceptions, that the expiry of the two - year limitation period in Ontario is a complete bar to a lawCourt of Appeal released its decision in Joseph v. Paramount Canada's Wonderland, 1 a case in which, under Ontario's new Limitations Act, the plaintiff's attorney failed to issue the statement of claim within the limitation period.2 The Court of Appeal unanimously eliminated any discretion that the court had to extend limitation periods based on «special circumstances» and held, subject to only a few exceptions, that the expiry of the two - year limitation period in Ontario is a complete bar to a lawCourt of Appeal unanimously eliminated any discretion that the court had to extend limitation periods based on «special circumstances» and held, subject to only a few exceptions, that the expiry of the two - year limitation period in Ontario is a complete bar to a lawcourt had to extend limitation periods based on «special circumstances» and held, subject to only a few exceptions, that the expiry of the two - year limitation period in Ontario is a complete bar to a lawsuit.

The Hong Kong Court of Appeal has recently handed down a decision in Pacific China Holdings Ltd v. Grand Pacific Holdings Ltd [1] overturning an order of the Court of First Instance to set aside an ICC arbitration award made in Hong Kong.

This new decision by the Court of Appeals holds that where the UM insurance company does not stipulate that they caused the injuries complained of, the facts regarding intoxication can come into evidence in the trial judge's discretion.

The Court of Appeal declined to reverse the trial judge's decision, holding that contra proferentem was inapplicable where ambiguity can be resolved with reference to the objective factual matrix, and further, that Talius's reliance on the subjective understanding of its representative did not assist in interpreting the contract:

Ian Gillis and his holding corporation appealed the Federal Court's decision to the Federal Court of Appeal.

In a ground - breaking decision released today, the Supreme Court of Canada in Saadati v. Moorhead, 2017 SCC 28, overturned the BC Court of Appeal and held that the finding of legally compensable mental injury need not rest, in whole or in part, on the claimant proving a recognized psychiatric injury.

On the same day, the High Court ruled that Christian prayers held before a council meeting were unlawful, and the Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the High Court that two Christian hotel owners had discriminated against gay clients by not offering them a double room.

However, in unanimous decision, the appeal court upheld the argument of the counsel to the Attorney - General of the Federation, Chief Emeka Ngige (SAN) that Justice Abang was held in error in granting some of the injunctive reliefs sought by Kashamu upon inadmissible evidence.

In a rare appellate court decision, the Court of Appeal in Walton v. Alberta (Securities Commission), 2014 ABCA 273, has set aside a decision by the Alberta Securities Commission and has held that any monetary penalties levied must be proportionate to the circumstances of the offender and supported by reacourt decision, the Court of Appeal in Walton v. Alberta (Securities Commission), 2014 ABCA 273, has set aside a decision by the Alberta Securities Commission and has held that any monetary penalties levied must be proportionate to the circumstances of the offender and supported by reaCourt of Appeal in Walton v. Alberta (Securities Commission), 2014 ABCA 273, has set aside a decision by the Alberta Securities Commission and has held that any monetary penalties levied must be proportionate to the circumstances of the offender and supported by reasons.

In fact, if the LSUC goes against the decision of the Federation of the Law Societies of Canada and the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in Trinity Western University v. British Columbia College of Teachers, it will be holding itself out as a court of appeal, said Court of Canada's ruling in Trinity Western University v. British Columbia College of Teachers, it will be holding itself out as a court of appeal, said court of appeal, said Kuhn.

The recent decision of the Privy Council (on appeal from the Jersey Court of Appeal) in Brazil v Durant International Corporation further demonstrates the need for trustees and nominees to properly understand both the source of the monies which they hold and the purpose of any transactions entered into, and the consequences of failing to appeal from the Jersey Court of Appeal) in Brazil v Durant International Corporation further demonstrates the need for trustees and nominees to properly understand both the source of the monies which they hold and the purpose of any transactions entered into, and the consequences of failing to Appeal) in Brazil v Durant International Corporation further demonstrates the need for trustees and nominees to properly understand both the source of the monies which they hold and the purpose of any transactions entered into, and the consequences of failing to do so.

Those cases are: Samarenko v Dawn Hill House Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1445, [2012] 2 All ER 476; Ampurius NU Homes Holdings Ltd v Telford Homes (Creekside) Ltd [2013] EWCA Civ 577, [2013] 4 All ER 377; and the Court of Appeal decision in the Urban 1 case [2013] EWCA Civ 816, [2013] All ER (D) 77 (Jul).

That is the question Lyle Denniston asked Friday at SCOTUSblog, as another round of decisions from the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals failed to address the cases involving the legal rights of foreign nationals being held at the U.S. military prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

A recent Court of Criminal Appeals decision held that a murder defendant suffered actual harm from the trial court's confusingly worded jury instructions on provocation and self - defCourt of Criminal Appeals decision held that a murder defendant suffered actual harm from the trial court's confusingly worded jury instructions on provocation and self - defcourt's confusingly worded jury instructions on provocation and self - defense.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the challenge, holding that there was nothing arbitrary or unfair in the judge's decision or reasoning.

Heavy reliance was placed on the Court of Appeal decision in Reeves v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [1999] QB169 in which it was held that causation could be established in a case founded on an illegal act where the alleged illegal act was the «very thing» that the defendant had a duty to prevent.

On Monday morning, he filed a notice with the court that he disagreed with the judge's decision to hold the hearing and would file an appeal.

As Cathy Kirkman reports today at Silicon Valley Media Law, a California appeals court issued a decision holding that the Florida dealer's «worldwide» Internet advertising was not enough to give California courts jurisdiction.

Yesterday, the Law Memo blog posted a link to a 9th Circuit decision, Pollard v. GEO Group, holding — contrary to what other courts of appeals have ruled — that federal prison inmates may recover damages under the Bivens doctrine from employees of private corporations running those prisons pursuant to contracts with the Bureau of Prisons.