Not exact matches
The Enrollment Program also authorizes a superior
court to have
jurisdiction over enrollees by allowing it to «appoint a receiver, monitor, conservator, or other designated fiduciary or officer
of the
court for a defendant or the defendant's assets,»
as well
as authorizes the Commissioner
of Business Oversight to «include in civil actions claims for ancillary relief, including restitution and disgorgement, on behalf
of a person injured,
as well
as attorney's fees and costs, and civil penalties
of up to $ 25,000» for up to four years after the purported violation occurred and «refer evidence regarding violations
of the bill's provisions to the Attorney
General, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
of the United States Department
of the Treasury, or the district attorney
of the county in which the violation occurred, who would be authorized, with or without this type
of a reference, to institute appropriate proceedings.»
«That you, lsah Hamman Misau
of Hamman Misau Residence, Turaki Street, Misau, Bauchi State, on or about August 10, 2017, at Abuja and other part
of Nigeria within the
jurisdiction of this Honourable
Court, did make a false statement
of fact to wit: that police officers pay
as much
as two million, five hundred thousand naira (N2.5 m) to get special promotion and posting through the Police Service Commission
as published in the Daily Trust Newspaper dated August 10, 2017, knowing that such false statement
of fact would harm the reputation
of Mr. Ibrahim Kpotun ldris (the serving Inspector -
General of Police), the Nigeria Police Force and the Police Service Commission and you thereby committed an offense.
(d) Except
as set forth in subparagraph (e) below, HBO and you agree that any dispute, claim or controversy arising out
of or relating to the Service or your use
of the Service, including the website, user interface, these Terms and this Arbitration Agreement, shall be determined on an individual basis, without class relief, by binding arbitration instead
of courts of general jurisdiction.
(a) Whenever the Attorney
General receives a complaint in writing signed by an individual to the effect that he is being deprived
of or threatened with the loss
of his right to the equal protection
of the laws, on account
of his race, color, religion, or national origin, by being denied equal utilization
of any public facility which is owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf
of any State or subdivision thereof, other than a public school or public college
as defined in section 401
of title IV hereof, and the Attorney
General believes the complaint is meritorious and certifies that the signer or signers
of such complaint are unable, in his judgment, to initiate and maintain appropriate legal proceedings for relief and that the institution
of an action will materially further the orderly progress
of desegregation in public facilities, the Attorney
General is authorized to institute for or in the name
of the United States a civil action in any appropriate district
court of the United States against such parties and for such relief
as may be appropriate, and such
court shall have and shall exercise
jurisdiction of proceedings instituted pursuant to this section.
(2) signed by an individual, or his parent, to the effect that he has been denied admission to or not permitted to continue in attendance at a public college by reason
of race, color, religion, or national origin, and the Attorney
General believes the complaint is meritorious and certifies that the signer or signers
of such complaint are unable, in his judgment, to initiate and maintain appropriate legal proceedings for relief and that the institution
of an action will materially further the orderly achievement
of desegregation in public education, the Attorney
General is authorized, after giving notice
of such complaint to the appropriate school board or college authority and after certifying that he is satisfied that such board or authority has had a reasonable time to adjust the conditions alleged in such complaint, to institute for or in the name
of the United States a civil action in any appropriate district
court of the United States against such parties and for such relief
as may be appropriate, and such
court shall have and shall exercise
jurisdiction of proceedings instituted pursuant to this section, provided that nothing herein shall empower any official or
court of the United States to issue any order seeking to achieve a racial balance in any school by requiring the transportation
of pupils or students from one school to another or one school district to another in order to achieve such racial balance, or otherwise enlarge the existing power
of the
court to insure compliance with constitutional standards.
For exactly this reason, Advocate
General Léger rightly advised in his opinion in the Baustahlgewebe case that the
jurisdiction of the
General Court must be understood «
as not extending to actions for compensation relating to judicial acts
of that
Court itself» (para 70).
Until recently
general jurisdiction over a defendant (i.e.
jurisdiction over any lawsuit against a defendant without regard to the particular facts
of the case) was present in any state where a company has a permanent office for the conduct
of business, under half a century
of precedent on the issue that traced back to a U.S. Supreme
Court case known
as International Shoe v. State
of Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945).
Constitutionally, Congress still has the authority to vest all U.S. District
Courts with
jurisdiction over any case in which the United States treated
as a single state for purposes
of general jurisdiction and specific
jurisdiction analysis.
But, the decision leaves Congress with the option
of potentially changing that statute which currently limits the personal
jurisdiction of federal trial
courts to that of a state court of general jurisdiction in the same state, as it already does in cases that are predominantly «in rem» (e.g. interpleader cases and interstate boundary and real property title disputes), in bankruptcy cases, and with respect to the subpoena power of U.S. District C
courts to that
of a state
court of general jurisdiction in the same state,
as it already does in cases that are predominantly «in rem» (e.g. interpleader cases and interstate boundary and real property title disputes), in bankruptcy cases, and with respect to the subpoena power
of U.S. District
CourtsCourts.
Existing statutory limits on federal
court jurisdiction limit the jurisdiction of the U.S. District Courts in most cases of cases to cases in which a state court in the state where the U.S. District Court is located would have either general jurisdiction or specific jurisdiction of the defendant (without regard to the fact that the case might be within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts as a matter of subject matter jurisdiction which pertains to the nature of the cause of action asserted rather than the ties of the defendant to the forum st
court jurisdiction limit the
jurisdiction of the U.S. District
Courts in most cases of cases to cases in which a state court in the state where the U.S. District Court is located would have either general jurisdiction or specific jurisdiction of the defendant (without regard to the fact that the case might be within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts as a matter of subject matter jurisdiction which pertains to the nature of the cause of action asserted rather than the ties of the defendant to the forum s
Courts in most cases
of cases to cases in which a state
court in the state where the U.S. District Court is located would have either general jurisdiction or specific jurisdiction of the defendant (without regard to the fact that the case might be within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts as a matter of subject matter jurisdiction which pertains to the nature of the cause of action asserted rather than the ties of the defendant to the forum st
court in the state where the U.S. District
Court is located would have either general jurisdiction or specific jurisdiction of the defendant (without regard to the fact that the case might be within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts as a matter of subject matter jurisdiction which pertains to the nature of the cause of action asserted rather than the ties of the defendant to the forum st
Court is located would have either
general jurisdiction or specific
jurisdiction of the defendant (without regard to the fact that the case might be within the exclusive
jurisdiction of the federal
courts as a matter of subject matter jurisdiction which pertains to the nature of the cause of action asserted rather than the ties of the defendant to the forum s
courts as a matter
of subject matter
jurisdiction which pertains to the nature
of the cause
of action asserted rather than the ties
of the defendant to the forum state).
(U.S. June 19, 2017) in which the
court finds that «specific personal
jurisdiction» (
as opposed to «
general jurisdiction») is lacking with regard to the claims
of members
of the class
of plaintiffs who are not California residents in this case brought in a California state trial
court (in an 8 - 1 decision with Justice Sotomayor dissenting).
The Brussels I Regulation (recast) foresees
as its
general rule
of jurisdiction that a defendant should be sued in the
courts of the Member state where he is domiciled (Article 4 (1)-RRB-.
Business Development: Brokering various business dealings that further the diversification
of Indian economies Developing and accessing commercial financial programs and services for tribal governments, including tax - exempt offerings and federally - guaranteed housing loans Serving
as issuer or underwriter's counsel in tribal bond issuances Ensuring tribal compliance with Bank Secrecy Act and other federal financial regulatory requirements Handling federal and state income, excise, B&O, property and other tax matters for tribes and tribal businesses Chartering tribal business enterprises under tribal, state and federal law Registering and protecting tribal trademarks and copyrights Negotiating franchise agreements for restaurants and retail stores on Indian reservations Custom - tailoring construction contracts for tribes and
general contractors Helping secure federal SBA 8 (a) and other contracting preferences for Indian - owned businesses Facilitating contractual relations between tribes and tribal casinos, and gaming vendors Building tribal workers» compensation and self - insurance programs Government Relations: Handling state and federal regulatory matters in the areas
of tribal gaming, environmental and cultural resources, workers» compensation, taxation, health care and education Negotiating tribal - state gaming compacts and fuel and cigarette compacts, and inter-local land use and law enforcement agreements Advocacy before the Washington State Gambling Commission, Washington Indian Gaming Association and National Indian Gaming Commission Preparing tribal codes and regulations, including tribal
court, commercial, gaming, taxation, energy development, environmental and cultural resources protection, labor & employment, and workers» compensation laws Developing employee handbooks, manuals and personnel policies Advocacy in areas
of treaty rights, gaming,
jurisdiction, taxation, environmental and cultural resource protection Brokering fee - to - trust and related real estate and jurisdictional transactions Litigation & Appellate Services: Handling complex Indian law litigation, including commercial, labor & employment, tax, land use, treaty rights, natural and cultural resource matters Litigating tribal trust mismanagement claims against the United States, and evaluating tribal and individual property claims under the Indian Claims Limitation Act Defending tribes and tribal insureds from tort claims brought against them in tribal, state and federal
courts, including defense tenders pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act Assisting tribal insureds in insurance coverage negotiations, and litigation Representing individual tribal members in tribal and state civil and criminal proceedings, including BIA prosecutions and Indian probate proceedings Assisting tribal governments with tribal, state and federal
court appeals, including the preparation
of amicus curiae briefs Our Indian law & gaming attorneys collaborate to publish the quarterly «Indian Legal Advisor ``, designed to provide Indian Country valuable information about legal and political developments affecting tribal rights.
The Superior
Court — known until 2004 as the Territorial Court — is the trial court of general jurisdiction in the V.I.. Its site includes extensive information about the court, as well as calendars, selected opinions and f
Court — known until 2004
as the Territorial
Court — is the trial court of general jurisdiction in the V.I.. Its site includes extensive information about the court, as well as calendars, selected opinions and f
Court — is the trial
court of general jurisdiction in the V.I.. Its site includes extensive information about the court, as well as calendars, selected opinions and f
court of general jurisdiction in the V.I.. Its site includes extensive information about the
court, as well as calendars, selected opinions and f
court,
as well
as calendars, selected opinions and forms.
AB 4395 (Constitutional Amendment) Authorizes retired supreme
court justices (in New York, the
court of general jurisdiction is the supreme
court) to serve
as justice
of supreme
court until age 80.
There is a precedent here: when the Quebec government asked the Supreme
Court of Canada for a reference on whether or not the federal law on assisted reproduction overstepped federal
jurisdiction by in effect criminalizing practices that should be considered
as falling within the sphere
of provincial health policy, an admittedly bitterly divided
Court agreed with Quebec's Attorney
General, at least with respect to certain key articles
of that law.
The Cour du Québec has a
general civil
jurisdiction governed by the Code
of Civil Procedure (
as are all Superior
Court civil matters) up to $ 85,000.
«the two
jurisdictions of the earlier commission and council respectively... [were] united in the... war
court, for which the
general designation
of «military commission» was retained
as the preferable one.»
this is the necessary result
of the
Court's decision, unless, in the alternative, that would be to imply that, in exercising such jurisdiction, there is only one kind of general court - martial, but there are two or more kinds of military commission, with wholly different procedures and with the result that «the commander in the field» will not be free to determine whether general court - martial or military commission shall be used as the circumstances may dictate, but must govern his choice by the kind of procedure he wishes to have empl
Court's decision, unless, in the alternative, that would be to imply that, in exercising such
jurisdiction, there is only one kind
of general court - martial, but there are two or more kinds of military commission, with wholly different procedures and with the result that «the commander in the field» will not be free to determine whether general court - martial or military commission shall be used as the circumstances may dictate, but must govern his choice by the kind of procedure he wishes to have empl
court - martial, but there are two or more kinds
of military commission, with wholly different procedures and with the result that «the commander in the field» will not be free to determine whether
general court - martial or military commission shall be used as the circumstances may dictate, but must govern his choice by the kind of procedure he wishes to have empl
court - martial or military commission shall be used
as the circumstances may dictate, but must govern his choice by the kind
of procedure he wishes to have employed.
Where an inferior
court can have no
jurisdiction of a case
of law or equity, the ground
of objection is not taken by plea in abatement,
as an exception
of the given case from the otherwise
general jurisdiction of the
court; appearance does not cure the defect
of judicial power, and it may be relied on by plea, answer, demurrer, or at the trial or hearing.
After engaging in a very exhaustive review and analysis
of the law in Pennsylvania,
as well
as other
jurisdictions, the Pennsylvania Supreme
Court held that
as a
general practitioner, Kim's client was under no specific or «heightened» duty in tort to refrain from sexual relations with his patient under the circumstances where he provided «incidental mental health treatment.»
As a denial
of jurisdiction over the subject matter
of a suit between parties within the realm, over which and whom the
court has power to act, can not be successful in an English
court of general jurisdiction, a motion like the present could not be sustained consistently with the principles
of its constitution.
On judicial review to the British Columbia Supreme
Court, the judge characterized the issue between Sechelt and the tenants
as one concerning money, not Indian lands, and agreed that the DRO had
jurisdiction to hear the dispute and apply the provisions
of the Manufactured Home Park Tenancy Act because it is a provincial law
of general application.
The
Court of Appeal disagreed with the tenants and the Attorney
General, finding that s. 31
of the Sechelt Indian Band Self - Government Act «can only have been intended to preserve the character
of the Sechelt Lands
as reserve lands subject to federal
jurisdiction» and that the lands continued,
as they were before self - government,
as lands reserved for Indians under s. 91 (24)
of the Constitution.
The supreme judicial and superior
courts shall have original and concurrent
jurisdiction of all cases and matters
of equity cognizable under the
general principles
of equity jurisprudence and, with reference thereto, shall be
courts of general equity
jurisdiction, except that the superior
court shall have exclusive original
jurisdiction of all actions in which injunctive relief is sought in any matter involving or growing out
of a labor dispute
as defined in section twenty C
of chapter one hundred and forty - nine.
In some
jurisdictions, such
as the Federal
Court of Australia, this trend has led to web - based and other initiatives to make the litigation process more accessible to the
general public.
Local district
courts have territorial
jurisdiction as established by the
General Assembly, most
of which is county wide.
As Québec expanded the jurisdiction of its provincial court over the last 50 years (for the most part, when it was governed by the Parti québécois), it took more and more out of the former exclusive jurisdiction of the Superior Court, impinging ever more on what the Supreme Court, in Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v British Columbia (Attorney General), 2014 SCC 59, [2014] 3 SCR 31, described as its «historic task... to resolve disputes between individuals and decide questions of private and public law»
As Québec expanded the
jurisdiction of its provincial
court over the last 50 years (for the most part, when it was governed by the Parti québécois), it took more and more out of the former exclusive jurisdiction of the Superior Court, impinging ever more on what the Supreme Court, in Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v British Columbia (Attorney General), 2014 SCC 59, [2014] 3 SCR 31, described as its «historic task... to resolve disputes between individuals and decide questions of private and public law&ra
court over the last 50 years (for the most part, when it was governed by the Parti québécois), it took more and more out
of the former exclusive
jurisdiction of the Superior
Court, impinging ever more on what the Supreme Court, in Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v British Columbia (Attorney General), 2014 SCC 59, [2014] 3 SCR 31, described as its «historic task... to resolve disputes between individuals and decide questions of private and public law&ra
Court, impinging ever more on what the Supreme
Court, in Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v British Columbia (Attorney General), 2014 SCC 59, [2014] 3 SCR 31, described as its «historic task... to resolve disputes between individuals and decide questions of private and public law&ra
Court, in Trial Lawyers Association
of British Columbia v British Columbia (Attorney
General), 2014 SCC 59, [2014] 3 SCR 31, described
as its «historic task... to resolve disputes between individuals and decide questions of private and public law»
as its «historic task... to resolve disputes between individuals and decide questions
of private and public law».
The
Court of Appeals shall have such appellate
jurisdiction as the
General Assembly may prescribe.
The
General Assembly shall have no power to deprive the judicial department
of any power or
jurisdiction that rightfully pertains to it
as a co-ordinate department
of the government, nor shall it establish or authorize any
courts other than
as permitted by this Article.
Where a
general statement
of law applies to every
jurisdiction and will be based on common caselaw principles, such
as a Supreme
Court of Canada decision or a consensus
of appellate cases in various provinces, or on a common statutory provision, such
as a similar provincial rule
of civil procedure, or common employment standards legislation:
This is because Belgium argues that Swiss
Courts are under an obligation to stay proceedings brought in that country not only
as a result
of the Lugano Convention but also because this result is dictated by the rules
of general international law relating to
jurisdiction.
The United States Supreme
Court has made clear twice within the last five years that a state court may assert general jurisdiction over a foreign corporation under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment «only when the corporation's affiliations with the State in which suit is brought are so constant and pervasive «as to render it essentially at home in the forum State.»&r
Court has made clear twice within the last five years that a state
court may assert general jurisdiction over a foreign corporation under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment «only when the corporation's affiliations with the State in which suit is brought are so constant and pervasive «as to render it essentially at home in the forum State.»&r
court may assert
general jurisdiction over a foreign corporation under the Due Process Clause
of the Fourteenth Amendment «only when the corporation's affiliations with the State in which suit is brought are so constant and pervasive «
as to render it essentially at home in the forum State.»»
(7A) The Governor ‑
General may, by Proclamation, declare that a Proclamation made under subsection (7) is revoked on and from a specified date and, on and after the specified date, this Act (including subsection (7)-RRB- has effect
as if the revoked Proclamation had not been made, but without prejudice to the effect
of the revoked Proclamation in respect
of the
jurisdiction of courts before the specified date.
(2AAC) Despite section 39B
of the Judiciary Act 1903, the Federal
Court of Australia does not have
jurisdiction with respect to a matter relating to the exercise by the Attorney ‑
General or the Chief Justice
of the power to consent
as mentioned in paragraph (2AAA)(a).
(1) The Governor ‑
General may, by Proclamation, fix a day
as the day on and after which a de facto financial cause may not be instituted in, or transferred to, a
court of summary
jurisdiction in a specified participating
jurisdiction.