Sentences with phrase «arguments in court today»

Not exact matches

I'm continuing my marriage equality and LGBTQ themed cartoons this week because today and tomorrow the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in two cases regarding same - sex marriage... one concerning California's Proposition 8 and...

Even today, eye witness accounts of crime are very weak arguments in a court of law.

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....

(UPDATED) Supreme Court today hears oral arguments in Greece v. Galloway, historic legislative prayer case.

New York state's highest court will hear arguments today about whether the man convicted of kidnapping Heidi Allen from a New Haven convenience store in 1994 should get a new trial.

Lewis joined Teachout and Wu at a press conference outside the Brooklyn courthouse where arguments were heard today in Cuomo's appeal of a state supreme court ruling that Teachout meets the residency requirements for governor set forth in the state constitution.

Eight small cities are fighting for more state aid in a legal battle that will begin oral arguments today in state Supreme Court in Albany.

Oral arguments in that case were held today in state Supreme Court in Syracuse.

Lawyers were scheduled to present arguments in Supreme Court today.

Closing arguments began earlier today in Broome County Court in the Murder trial of Almond Upton of Florida.

A federal court in Tennessee heard arguments yesterday and today on whether lie detection technology based on fMRI scans of brain activity should be admitted in a criminal case involving a psychologist accused of defrauding Medicare.

As the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is busy girding itself for a fight over new greenhouse gas emissions rules, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments today in a case on whether lawsuits over climate ought to be permitted.

The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments today in a case that could undermine the financial stability of teacher unions in California and 23 other states.

Once the briefs are all filed, the court will schedule a date for oral arguments, but there is no timeframe on when the court must schedule it, Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., the plaintiffs» lead co-counsel, explained in a phone call today with reporters.

Today, on Milton Friedman Legacy Day, the Nevada Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in two lawsuits against the state's education savings account (ESA) law.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Craig Karlan said today that he is not in favor of delaying the release of Brütal Legend, but pushed back arguments and a formal ruling on the affair for one week.

Today, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a challenge to public - sector unions» ability to extract forced dues from non-members.

18 Unlike the extracurricular interscholastic competitions that bear the same name today, the moot courts of this period were mandatory exercises in the law school curriculum, modeled after the «moots» of the Inns of Courts in England.19 The law school professors of the day gave the students a fictitious case and assisted the students in drafting the pleadings and other documents, preparing the arguments, and then arguing the case.20 In theory, if not always in practice, these were the forerunners of today's legal writing classes that emphasize persuasive wrcourts of this period were mandatory exercises in the law school curriculum, modeled after the «moots» of the Inns of Courts in England.19 The law school professors of the day gave the students a fictitious case and assisted the students in drafting the pleadings and other documents, preparing the arguments, and then arguing the case.20 In theory, if not always in practice, these were the forerunners of today's legal writing classes that emphasize persuasive writinin the law school curriculum, modeled after the «moots» of the Inns of Courts in England.19 The law school professors of the day gave the students a fictitious case and assisted the students in drafting the pleadings and other documents, preparing the arguments, and then arguing the case.20 In theory, if not always in practice, these were the forerunners of today's legal writing classes that emphasize persuasive wrCourts in England.19 The law school professors of the day gave the students a fictitious case and assisted the students in drafting the pleadings and other documents, preparing the arguments, and then arguing the case.20 In theory, if not always in practice, these were the forerunners of today's legal writing classes that emphasize persuasive writinin England.19 The law school professors of the day gave the students a fictitious case and assisted the students in drafting the pleadings and other documents, preparing the arguments, and then arguing the case.20 In theory, if not always in practice, these were the forerunners of today's legal writing classes that emphasize persuasive writinin drafting the pleadings and other documents, preparing the arguments, and then arguing the case.20 In theory, if not always in practice, these were the forerunners of today's legal writing classes that emphasize persuasive writinIn theory, if not always in practice, these were the forerunners of today's legal writing classes that emphasize persuasive writinin practice, these were the forerunners of today's legal writing classes that emphasize persuasive writing.

Second is today's oral argument before the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, which «concerns the torture of Ogoni leaders in Nigeria, but at stake is the future of the law under which this case was brought, the Alien Tort Statute.»

Access online the transcript of today's U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Watters v. Wachovia Bank, N.A., No. 05 - 1342: The transcript can be accessed at this link.

Today's Supreme Court decision in Kimbrough v. U.S. (see earlier post) doesn't directly address the retroactivity issue (at least, I didn't see it), but Professor Berman suggests that defendants who preserved the disparity argument may have grounds for seeking modified sentences in the aftermath of Kimbrough (while those who didn't preserve the argument are out of luck).

The United States Supreme Court begins its new term today by hearing arguments in Klobel, Esther, et al. v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, et al. (10 - 1491)(regarding corporate tort liability for violations of the law of nations) and Lozman, Fane v. Riviera Beach, FL (11 - 626)(regarding whether moored floating structures constitute «vessels»).

Suffolk University Law School, in cooperation with the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, today began live webcasts of oral arguments before the cCourt of Massachusetts, today began live webcasts of oral arguments before the courtcourt.

Today the court announced that, in addition to the live webcasts, it will provide permanent archives, posted to the Web within four days of the arguments.

You can access at this link the transcript of today's U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Abramski v. United States, No. 12 - 1493.

Update: You can access at this link the transcript of today's U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Paroline v. United States, No. 12 - 8561.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco will offer live audio streaming of all oral arguments beginning today, it announced last week.

Today's going to be an interesting day at the Supreme Court: they're hearing argument in the Election Act appeal (Ted Opitz, et al. v. Borys Wrzesnewskyj, et al.), the first such direct appeal brought to this cCourt: they're hearing argument in the Election Act appeal (Ted Opitz, et al. v. Borys Wrzesnewskyj, et al.), the first such direct appeal brought to this courtcourt.

From corporate boardrooms to PI law offices, all eyes today are on the Supreme Court, which hears arguments in Philip Morris USA v. Williams on the extent to which punitive damages can punish a tobacco company for «highly reprehensible» conduct and for the effects of its conduct on non-parties.

Today, the Supreme Court rejected the Karan argument and changed the long standing rule on benefits, which has been in effect for more than121 years:

Law bloggers rarely concur on any topic, but in the aftermath of today's oral argument before the Supreme Court in Stoneridge v. Scientific Atlanta, most are predicting a victory for business advisers and a loss for the plaintiffs bar.

«In an unusual summary opinion, without hearing oral argument, the Court today sent back to the 11th Circuit for further review its holding that a jury verdict in favor of two employees was appropriately set asidIn an unusual summary opinion, without hearing oral argument, the Court today sent back to the 11th Circuit for further review its holding that a jury verdict in favor of two employees was appropriately set asidin favor of two employees was appropriately set aside.

Access online the transcript of today's U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Skilling v. United States, No. 08 - 1394: The Court has posted the transcript at this link.

Two weeks from today, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Claiborne and Rita, two cases that will explore what Booker really means for federal sentencing.

Evan Banker gave the oral argument before the Court of Appeals in support of the trial court's ruling, and is quoted in the Steamboat TCourt of Appeals in support of the trial court's ruling, and is quoted in the Steamboat Tcourt's ruling, and is quoted in the Steamboat Today.

Access online, on - demand C - SPAN's broadcast of today's en banc oral argument before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Maher Arar v. John Ashcroft: You can access the oral argument video by clicking here (RealPlayer required).

Today, Justice Department lawyer John O'Quinn pushed that argument further, telling Robertson that detainees charged in the commissions have no access to the district court if a military judge designates them an «unlawful enemy combatant.»

You can access at this link the transcript of today's U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, No. 12 - 133.

«Court Hears Arguments on Americans Held in Iraq»: Linda Greenhouse has this article today in The New York Times.

Access online the transcripts of today's U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments: You can access the transcript of today's oral argument in Indiana v. Edwards, No. 07 - 208, at this link.

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.

The Supreme Court heard oral argument today in another patent case, Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc..

Washington, D.C. — Today, following the U.S. Supreme Court hearing of legal arguments in Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, Karen Pearl, interim president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, issued the following statement:

Today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Janus v. AFSCME, a historic case that will impact working people's freedom to join together fight for decent and equitable pay, affordable health care, quality schools, vibrant communities and a secure future for all of us.

«Our legal counsel will review the application today and we will have further information for our members once we've had time for that analysis... We are firm in our position that the outstanding commission funds should be treated as a trust, as agreed by the receivers, and will be making that argument to the court.»