Even today, eye witness accounts of crime are very weak
arguments in a court of law.
«CSEA has tried to get local officials to do what's right by making
our argument in the court of public opinion,» Donohue said.
Not exact matches
Last week, the U.S. Supreme
Court heard oral
arguments in an important pair
of cases, namely Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood v. Sebelius.
Still, experts said those comments were likely to hurt the government's case
in the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals, which heard
arguments on Tuesday night over whether the TRO should be upheld while the order's legality is established.
Gallagher said that the level
of transparency and the variety
of protections
in the United states «match anything
in Europe» and said the
court had not heard expert
arguments on the quality
of U.S. privacy protections.
The suits are part
of a group
of at least four other cases with similar
arguments in various
courts around the country, and they make legal experts wary, particularly as the differences
in opinion seem to indicate their destiny to go before the Supreme
Court.
The eight - justice
court is hearing
arguments Monday
in two cases that deal with the same basic issue
of whether race played too large a role
in the drawing
of electoral districts, to the detriment
of African - Americans.
Judges at the 9th US Circuit
Court of Appeals,
in San Francisco, will hear
arguments from both parties on Tuesday.
His case illustrates the difficulty
of succeeding with such a defense at a time when a Colorado
court is preparing to hear similar
arguments in the trial over a movie theater shooting
in which 12 people were killed.
In the notice
of his decision, New York Supreme
Court Justice Manuel Mendez supported the
arguments made by Schneiderman at the November 25 hearing and did not appear to be sympathetic to or convinced by those
of DraftKings or FanDuel attorneys.
The first blockbuster case on the
court's calendar is Oct. 10, when the justices will hear
argument in a fight over the University
of Texas» affirmative action program.
Federal appeals
courts in the states
of Washington and Virginia are set to hear
arguments this week on the legality
of President Donald Trump's most recent travel ban, which sharply limits visitors and immigrants from eight countries, six
of them Muslim - majority.
The
Court of Appeal rejected the
arguments, saying Mars Canada had an obvious interest
in defending its trademark rights, and it did sustain actual damages given that its sales were cannibalized by the grey market products.
When she exited the Supreme
Court in March 2013 after the justices heard
arguments in her case, hundreds
of supporters chanted «Edie!
The Supreme
Court is set to hear
arguments Wednesday
in a case that could derail the Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly referred to as Obamacare, and potentially increase the cost
of insurance for millions across the U.S.. It's a big deal, and it has insurance companies, medical providers and everyday workers holding their breath.
NEW YORK, April 16 - A lawyer for victims
of terrorist attacks
in Israel on Monday urged a federal appeals
court to revive their lawsuit against Facebook Inc, saying Mark Zuckerberg's congressional testimony undermined the social media company's
argument that it bore no responsibility for content on its platforms.
The
court said it was unconvinced by the U.S.
arguments regarding the alleged negative effects
of the EU decision on its tax revenues, the bilateral tax deals with EU countries and its efforts to develop rules on transfer pricing
in line with OECD rules.
In returning its verdict Thursday afternoon on the sixth day of deliberations, the Superior Court jury also pronounced Jose Ines Garcia Zarate not guilty of assault with a firearm, finding credence in defense attorneys» argument that the shot that ricocheted off the concrete ground before piercing Steinle's heart was an accident, with the gun discharging after the defendant stumbled upon it on the waterfront on July 1, 201
In returning its verdict Thursday afternoon on the sixth day
of deliberations, the Superior
Court jury also pronounced Jose Ines Garcia Zarate not guilty
of assault with a firearm, finding credence
in defense attorneys» argument that the shot that ricocheted off the concrete ground before piercing Steinle's heart was an accident, with the gun discharging after the defendant stumbled upon it on the waterfront on July 1, 201
in defense attorneys»
argument that the shot that ricocheted off the concrete ground before piercing Steinle's heart was an accident, with the gun discharging after the defendant stumbled upon it on the waterfront on July 1, 2015.
Q. On the reference case the Supreme
Court of Canada is slated to hear sometime in the spring, do you plan to file arguments with the court supporting the federal government's posi
Court of Canada is slated to hear sometime
in the spring, do you plan to file
arguments with the
court supporting the federal government's posi
court supporting the federal government's position?
In a terse decision, Judge Gregory A. Presnell of the United States District Court in Orlando rejected the former workers» arguments that Disney and the two contractors had colluded to make false statements when they applied for temporary visas, known as H - 1B, for the foreign replacement
In a terse decision, Judge Gregory A. Presnell
of the United States District
Court in Orlando rejected the former workers» arguments that Disney and the two contractors had colluded to make false statements when they applied for temporary visas, known as H - 1B, for the foreign replacement
in Orlando rejected the former workers»
arguments that Disney and the two contractors had colluded to make false statements when they applied for temporary visas, known as H - 1B, for the foreign replacements.
Two previous
arguments by the Standing Rock tribe - that the construction had threatened sacred sites, and that the presence
of oil
in the pipeline would damage sacred waters, had been rejected by the
court.
On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme
Court heard oral
argument in the Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund case, which addresses the preemptive scope
of the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act
of 1998 (SLUSA).
OTTAWA — As Finance Minister Jim Flaherty delivers the federal budget Thursday
in the House
of Commons, the Office
of the Parliamentary Budget Officer will deliver
arguments in court seeking clarity on its mandate and more information on the Conservative government's spending cuts.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Timothy T. Howard (R) speaks during closing
arguments in the trial
of Ross Ulbricht (L), the suspected operator
of the underground website Silk Road, as seen
in a courtroom sketch
in Federal
Court in New York February 4, 2015.
While the committee grilled Zuckerberg about why he wanted a special class
of stock, Andreessen sent the CEO text messages to explain which
of his
arguments weren't working and why, according to messages quoted
in court filings.
During closing
arguments in the trial earlier this week, Leon asked the Justice Department's lead attorney, Craig Conrath, whether the imposition
of a remedy would mean that the
court was recognizing that there is anticompetitive harm.
There are a number
of examples
in Canadian case law where issuers were attempting to sell «utilities» or something similar to modern day tokens and coins, where the
court simply didn't buy the
argument.
Trump's lawyers have made a number
of arguments to try to get Zervos's suit dismissed, but the most important has to do with the fact that Zervos is suing
in New York state
court.
New York Supreme
Court Judge Jennifer G. Schecter rejected that argument on Tuesday, arguing that the logic of Clinton v. Jones was just as applicable in state court as in federal c
Court Judge Jennifer G. Schecter rejected that
argument on Tuesday, arguing that the logic
of Clinton v. Jones was just as applicable
in state
court as in federal c
court as
in federal
courtcourt.
More recently,
in In re NYSE Euronext Shareholders Litigation, then - Chancellor Strine of the Delaware Court of Chancery, in a bench ruling following oral argument, declined to issue a preliminary injunction on a stockholder vote to approve the proposed merger between NYSE Euronext («NYSE Euronext») and IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. («ICE»
in In re NYSE Euronext Shareholders Litigation, then - Chancellor Strine of the Delaware Court of Chancery, in a bench ruling following oral argument, declined to issue a preliminary injunction on a stockholder vote to approve the proposed merger between NYSE Euronext («NYSE Euronext») and IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. («ICE»
In re NYSE Euronext Shareholders Litigation, then - Chancellor Strine
of the Delaware
Court of Chancery,
in a bench ruling following oral argument, declined to issue a preliminary injunction on a stockholder vote to approve the proposed merger between NYSE Euronext («NYSE Euronext») and IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. («ICE»
in a bench ruling following oral
argument, declined to issue a preliminary injunction on a stockholder vote to approve the proposed merger between NYSE Euronext («NYSE Euronext») and IntercontinentalExchange, Inc. («ICE»).
A federal district
court in Washington, D.C. heard
arguments Aug. 25
in one case filed by the National Association
of Fixed Annuities.
Amid the flurry
of essays on religious liberty occasioned by the Supreme
Court's hearing
arguments in the Hobby Lobby case, these two sentences from Rick Warren's otherwise excellent op - ed
in the Washington Post stood out to me:
In March, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in two appeals cases related to same - sex marriage - California's Proposition 8, which bans same - sex marriage and the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which denies federal benefits to same - sex couple
In March, the Supreme
Court will hear oral
arguments in two appeals cases related to same - sex marriage - California's Proposition 8, which bans same - sex marriage and the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which denies federal benefits to same - sex couple
in two appeals cases related to same - sex marriage - California's Proposition 8, which bans same - sex marriage and the federal Defense
of Marriage Act, which denies federal benefits to same - sex couples.
This fall the U.S. Supreme
Court will consider
arguments in a case that goes to the very heart
of the constitutional guarantee
of free exercise
of religion.
Sometimes these sources point
in different directions — as when a right not recognized
in the past becomes widely understood as fundamental — and a
court has to make a judgment between the two lines
of argument.
At Wednesday's oral
arguments, the
court's conservative majority appeared to have the votes to allow the public prayers to continue
in some form, but both sides expressed concerns about the level
of judicial and government oversight over prayers presented by members
of a particular faith.
In legislative politics and, for that matter, in Court doctrine, nothing is forever — an observation that is, as I understand it, at the heart of Mr. Harris» argumen
In legislative politics and, for that matter,
in Court doctrine, nothing is forever — an observation that is, as I understand it, at the heart of Mr. Harris» argumen
in Court doctrine, nothing is forever — an observation that is, as I understand it, at the heart
of Mr. Harris»
argument.
Kirsten: There's an article
in The New York Times about Supreme
Court Justice John Paul Stevens basically making this
argument that for the first 200 years
of the country it was just accepted that the Second Amendment was understood to protect a well - regulated militia.
Here David Brooks makes the
argument that Elena Kagan, Obama's latest nominee to the Supreme
Court, is reminscent
of our elite schools» «Organization Kids» — bright, disciplined, articulate, and well - meaning junior careerists who do everything necessary to get ahead
in....
Noting that lower
courts had not addressed is accusation
of selective enforcement (and that the Supreme
Court «is not the proper forum to air the issue
in the first instance»), Ginsburg said the Ninth Circuit
Court could consider the
argument.
«This is a huge win for religious liberty,» said Douglas Laycock, a University
of Virginia Law School professor who represented the church at the Supreme
Court's oral
arguments in October.
A federal judge will hear
arguments Monday on a temporary restraining order against an Oklahoma referendum that would ban the use
of Islamic religious law
in state
courts.
On January 20, a federal appeals
court heard
arguments in the highly publicized case
of Kimberly Jean «Kim» Davis, county clerk
of Rowan County (population 23,000)
in mountainous northeastern Kentucky.
In «Courting Cowardice,» published this week in the New York Times, Maureen Dowd attacks the natural law argument that since marriage is for procreation, homosexual couples are de facto incapable of being marrie
In «
Courting Cowardice,» published this week
in the New York Times, Maureen Dowd attacks the natural law argument that since marriage is for procreation, homosexual couples are de facto incapable of being marrie
in the New York Times, Maureen Dowd attacks the natural law
argument that since marriage is for procreation, homosexual couples are de facto incapable
of being married.
If the
argument here is correct, the two developments result from some
of the same causes: The American kind
of church - state separation meant no church monopolized religious symbols;
courts were called upon to articulate ultimate purpose and justice; and judges felt little ambivalence
in doing so.
The reasons for accepting it do not form the kind
of deductive proof we require
in logic or pure mathematics, but they resemble the
arguments used
in a
court of law to establish innocence or culpability.
Your
arguments are absurd, immaterial to the issue, and if you were arguing this
in a
court of law, you would most assuredly be ruled against.
Tomorrow and Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme
Court will hear
arguments in two cases regarding same - sex marriage... one concerning California's Proposition 8 and the other the Defense
of Marriage Act.
Today, the United States Supreme
Court is hearing oral
arguments in the state
of California's appeal
of a Ninth Circuit decision declaring unconstitutional a statute enacted
in that state which restricted minors» access to graphically violent video games....
The aim
of the event is to «provoke a challenge from the U.S. Internal Revenue Service
in order to file a lawsuit and have its
argument out
in court.»