Sentences with phrase «cites court opinions»

Not exact matches

A San Francisco federal judge, in what was apparently the first case to cite last month's SCOTUS opinion Cyan v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund remanded a securities class action against a blockchain startup to San Francisco Superior Court while keeping another in federal cCourt while keeping another in federal courtcourt.

The Stenberg dissenters repeatedly cited and quoted Justice O'Connor's abortion opinions from the 1980s, in which she had criticized the Court for operating as «the nation's ex officio medical board with powers to approve or disapprove medical and operative practices and standards throughout the United States.»

He cites the role of the Bible in teaching literacy; Charles Finney's conversion, brought about by his study of Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws; and an 1892 Supreme Court opinion, Church of the Holy Trinity v. U.S., which stated, «This is a Christian nation.»

The European rejection of the death penalty, which advocates of abolishing the death penalty in the United States cite as evidence of an emerging international consensus that ought to influence our Supreme Court, is related both to the past overuse of it by European nations (think of the executions for petty larceny in eighteenth - century England, the Reign of Terror in France, and the rampant employment of the death penalty by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union) and to the less democratic cast of European politics, which makes elite opinion more likely to override public opinion there than in the United States [emboldening mine].

The text cited in Whipple vs. Martinson was from the majority opinion of the US Supreme Court, not Congress.

The Supreme Court opinion, penned by Justice Stephen Breyer cites basic principles for rejecting the Prometheus patents.

However, Supreme court does not have the power to issue advisory opinions (I'll cite if need be, but its much more of a the thing does not exist so I'd kinda have to cite all of reality).

«Adding law review citations to judicial opinions helps us rank search results more intelligently, for example, giving a relevance boost to cases that aren't cited by courts, but are cited by law review articles.

And you can now find all online materials cited in the Court's opinions since the October 2005 term on the Supreme Court's homepage.

The guide relates that the online materials cited in one Supreme Court bench opinion were already «deleted before the opinion was published in the U. S. Reports.»

To ensure the authority supporting the Court's opinions remain available, the guide advises doing what the Court always has: Use and cite the official print version of a document where this is available.

I do think that some of them nicely illustrate a larger problem — that (in some terms of the Court or with some clerks) Blackmun was shockingly uninvolved with the basic task of writing opinions, serving more as a substantive cite - checker for his clerks» writing the opinions.

One way to do this in federal court is to cite only unpublished opinions, which «are not binding precedent.»

Here is an example of a Michigan Supreme Court opinion citing UK case law that it has adopted:

Here in the US, legal publishers also could cut to the chase by adding paragraph numbering to court opinions in their e-text where pagination has not yet been officially eliminated for pinpoint cites.

Many times, courts will lift string - cites and parentheticals from other judicial opinions, with a notation such as «cited in...» Is that plagiarism — or precedent?

Now, if the court opinion you view in Ravel was ever discussed or cited in a Cooley alert, the two are linked.

And most people actively use unpublished opinions and there's a lot of courts say you can't cite a case that's not been published in a book, but that's evaporating day by day.

I believe today that all cites to all court opinions should have the docket number of the case in it.

Greene has not cited — and the Court has not found — a single statute, regulation, rule, or judicial opinion holding that a litigant has a right of access (under the First Amendment, the common law, or anything else) to communications between a judge and his or her law clerk, including draft opinions and orders.

Professor Doug Berman's weblog, Sentencing Law and Policy has become the informational locus of the debate, with multiple courts citing it in opinions, and serious scholars of sentencing policy checking it almost daily.

Select any judge to bring up the same types of analytics discussed above — most - frequently cited opinions of that judge and the opinions, courts and judges that judge most frequently cites.

Clearly, this is intended to address the problem of link rot documented by Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert and Lawrence Lessig in 2013, when they found that half of the URLs within Supreme Court opinions do not link to the originally cited information.

Now, if the court opinion you view in Ravel was ever discussed or cited -LSB-...]

Opinions, showing the opinions — from whatever court — that the 1st Circuit most frequently cites in its own oOpinions, showing the opinions — from whatever court — that the 1st Circuit most frequently cites in its own oopinions — from whatever court — that the 1st Circuit most frequently cites in its own opinionsopinions.

In the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, for example, the most - cited case is U.S. v. Zannino, 895 F. 2d 1 (1990), which has been cited by 1,476 opinions.

Oh, and in its opinion the Delaware Supreme Court cited the second edition of A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting.

The court cited a 1904 Illinois opinion, as well as multiple out - of - state opinions in classifying moving trains as an obvious danger that should be recognized by the «ordinary intelligent boy.»

Jump - start your research with key quotations from leading court opinions (not just string cites) handpicked by expert practitioners.

While the view supported by Ian Binnie's opinion and Moldaver J.'s dissent focus on the absurdity of going to the high court just one day after rejoining the Barreau du Québec, a different absurdity was pointed out by Professors Michael Plaxton and Carissima Mathen, in an article cited by the majority, a point raised by the Attorney General of Québed in oral argument:

However, an opinion from the California Court of Appeal that is directly on point to the facts in a particular case can not be cited as persuasive authority by a party or a cCourt of Appeal that is directly on point to the facts in a particular case can not be cited as persuasive authority by a party or a courtcourt.

The author of this article requested that the California Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division Two (Riverside) take judicial notice of an unpublished opinion cited solely for any pursuasive value the case may have in a pending appeal.

Parties should be free to cite unpublished opinions as persuasive, while not binding upon the court.

In this conflict, the judicial notice statute should take precedence, and courts should allow unpublished opinions to be cited as persuasive authority.

Ravel Law and Bloomberg can provide data on how often your trial judge's opinions are cited by other courts — an indicator of how well respected the judge is by his or her peers — as well as how often the judge is appealed, and how many of those appeals have been partially or completely successful.

The Enbridge opinion cited with approval to a 1960 Illinois Supreme Court decision where it was ruled proper to exclude opinions of condemnation witnesses who had considered proper, along with improper, and speculative criteria in their analysis.

South Carolina Appellate Court Rule 268 (d)(2) states, «Memorandum opinions and unpublished orders have no precedential value and should not be cited except in proceedings in which they are directly involved.»

In saying that a best efforts obligation is more onerous than a reasonable efforts obligation, the FMC article cites an opinion of the British Columbia Supreme Court, Atmospheric Diving Systems Inc. v. International Hard Suits Inc. (1994), 89 B.C.L.R. (2d) 356 (S.C.).

Justice Kagan, delivering the opinion of the Court and citing Stolt - Nielsen S. A. v. AnimalFeeds Int» l Corp., 559 U. S. 662, 684 (2010), concluded that the arbitrator's decision survives the limited judicial review § 10 (a)(4) allows.

Available at http://harvardlawreview.org/2014/03/perma-scoping-and-addressing-the-problem-of-link-and-reference-rot-in-legal-citations/ (finding that 49.9 % of websites cited in US Supreme Court opinions and 29.9 - 34.2 % cited in three law reviews no longer linked to the originally cited material — at 180, 186)... [Link to full Rotten World blog post.]

Citing a previous Attorney General opinion, the Court of Appeals noted «If, however, an alleged contemnor is not personally served with the rule to show cause, the family court may, pursuant to the provisions of section 20-7-870 [now § 63-17-390], use the scheduled court time to conduct a hearing to determine whether there is «competent proof» of disobedience of the court oCourt of Appeals noted «If, however, an alleged contemnor is not personally served with the rule to show cause, the family court may, pursuant to the provisions of section 20-7-870 [now § 63-17-390], use the scheduled court time to conduct a hearing to determine whether there is «competent proof» of disobedience of the court ocourt may, pursuant to the provisions of section 20-7-870 [now § 63-17-390], use the scheduled court time to conduct a hearing to determine whether there is «competent proof» of disobedience of the court ocourt time to conduct a hearing to determine whether there is «competent proof» of disobedience of the court ocourt order.

As more and more counties are adopting mandatory mediation, at least on the family court side, there is a compelling need for attorneys to have more than a passing knowledge of the ADR Rules, especially if the Rules are being cited with more frequency in appellate court opinions.

Well, yesterday I noticed that in an opinion issued this week (here) the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals had cited it too, the issue in this case being where to place the defined - term parenthetical when you create an integrated definition.

Though disdaining Wikipedia, the Lawson court itself relied on a private internet website as of 2011, noting it had been «updated June 2010,» for a factual foundation for its legal holding of a rational basis for the federal statute on animal fighting activities.40 Likewise, in the body of its opinion in State v. D.C., 41 the Fifth District cited various websites addressing how HIV can be transmitted.

Delivering the unanimous opinion of the Court and citing Stolt - Nielsen S. A. v. AnimalFeeds Int» l Corp., 559 U. S. 662, 684 (2010), Justice Kagan concluded that the arbitrator's decision survives the limited judicial review § 10 (a)(4) allows.

She says the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is creating a public database with opinions cited in pdf.

While the Court began its opinion by ruling in favor of Leonard on the plaintiff's manufacturing defect claim citing a lack of evidence that the valve was not installed as an anti-scald device, Leonard's fortunes quickly deteriorated.

Mr. Liskin assisted in drafting an Amicus Brief to the United States Supreme Court that was cited by the majority opinion in a First Amendment case.

No Supreme Court opinion, including concurrences and dissents, has ever cited Bush v. Gore.

Last month, in «We Won't See You in Court: The Era of Tort Lawsuits Is Waning,» the Wall Street Journal took a look at the decline in tort lawsuit filings and the reasons fueling the decline, citing «state restrictions on litigation, the increasing cost of bringing suits, improved auto safety, and a long campaign by businesses to turn public opinion against plaintiffs and their lawyers.»