Sentences with phrase «courts under the federal rules»

«(A) the evidence would otherwise be admissible in the court under the Federal Rules of Evidence; or

92 JoEllen Lind, supra note 89, at 769 — 70 (citing 11 states rejecting all or part of the summary judgment standard articulated by the United States Supreme Court under Federal Rule Civil Procedure 56, and noting that differing state and federal summary judgment standards «make it much more likely that a defendant in federal court will obtain summary judgment than a defendant in state court»); J. Palmer Lockard, Summary Judgment in Pennsylvania: Time for Another Look at Credibility, 35 Duq.

For example, in U.S. federal courts under the federal rules of evidence, which are copied verbatim or in substance by many state courts, the necessity of an original document for use a court evidence is covered mostly by Rules 901 - 903 (authentication and identification) and by Rules 1001 - 1008 (contents of writings, recordings and photographs).

Not exact matches

This was the first ruling by a federal court to confirm the CFTC's determination in 2015 that cryptos are commodities under the Commodity Exchange Act, that it can regulate them, and that it can pursue those it alleges to have engaged in fraud and manipulation schemes on crypto exchanges.

The class action, filed in United States District Court, Southern District of New York, and docketed under 18 - cv - 02213, is on behalf of a class consisting of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired BRF American Depositary Receipts («ADRs») between April 4, 2013 and March 2, 2018, both dates inclusive (the «Class Period»), seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants» violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the «Exchange Act») and Rule 10b - 5 promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top officials.

The class action, filed in United States District Court, for the District of Illinois, Eastern Division, is on behalf of a class consisting of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Akorn's securities between March 1, 2017 through February 26, 2018, both dates inclusive (the «Class Period»), seeking to recover damages caused by defendants» violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10 (b) and 20 (a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b - 5 promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top officials.

In January, a federal appeals court ruled that because ISPs are not regulated as utilities, equal access regulations could not apply to these providers, as they do with telecommunications carriers under the Communications Act of 1934.

Heather Dietrick, president and general counsel of Gawker Media, said in a statement that soon after Mr. Bollea sued the company in 2012, three state appeals court judges and a federal judge «repeatedly ruled that Gawker's post was newsworthy» under the First Amendment.

Flaherty asked the court to rule that the federal government can take this step under its constitutional jurisdiction over trade and commerce.

In a major decision, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled 6 - 3 that the federal subsidies that help nearly 6.4 million people pay for their Affordable Care Act health plans are legal under the Affordable Care Act.

Even if regulators do not act, when a presale results in nothing more than profits for its promoter, a disgruntled investor will inevitably make a private securities fraud claim to try and claw back some of their capital; assuming a court will determine a presale of digital tokens to be a private placement of securities, any such federal claim would fall under Rule 10b - 5.

You will want to discuss all of your options with your attorney or tax advisor before taking action, especially if creditor protection is a concern for you, as the Supreme Court has ruled that Inherited IRAs are not protected under federal bankruptcy laws (although state law creditor protection of inherited IRAs still varies).

On 6 August 2013, Federal Judge Amos Mazzant of the Eastern District of Texas of the Fifth Circuit ruled that bitcoins are «a currency or a form of money» (specifically securities as defined by Federal Securities Laws), and as such were subject to the court's jurisdiction, [274][274] and Germany's Finance Ministry subsumed bitcoins under the term «unit of account» — a financial instrument — though not as e-money or a functional currency, a classification nonetheless having legal and tax implications.

Mr. Lieberman is working with the Firm's international clients to craft a response to the Supreme Court's ruling in Morrison v. Nat» l Australia Bank, Ltd., which limited the ability of foreign investors to seek redress under the federal securities laws.

On March 6, 2018, Judge Jack B. Weinstein of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York ruled that virtual currencies are commodities under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and therefore subject to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's (CFTC) anti-fraud and anti-manipulation enforcement authority.1 Granting the CFTC's request for a preliminary injunction against the defendants who allegedly engaged in deception and fraud involving virtual currency spot markets, Judge Weinstein noted that «[u] ntil Congress clarifies the matter,» the CFTC has «concurrent authority» along with other state and federal administrative agencies and civil and criminal courts over transactions in virtual currency.2

He then brought a new case in the federal courts to consider, among other things, whether a state could reverse the «once free, always free» principle under which the St. Louis County Court had ruled in Scott's favor.

«Right now the situation is in a holding pattern because the IRS has found its internal policies under fire by federal court ruling,» said senior policy analyst Rob Boston.

Typically, if a party to litigation is successful in such a transfer, a case would proceed in the federal court system under federal procedural rules.

When the trial court ruled against the AG's office, we encouraged them to appeal, but unfortunately the chances of a successful appeal under the federal Natural Gas Act were low.

SB 219 would serve to clarify employer requirements and keep New Hampshire in compliance with current Federal laws and court decisions, including the March 25 Supreme Court ruling on Young vs United Parcel Service (UPS), which ruled in favor of Peggy Young to reverse the lower court's decision and to have a trial, after she sued UPS under the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act, for failure to provide pregnancy accommodFederal laws and court decisions, including the March 25 Supreme Court ruling on Young vs United Parcel Service (UPS), which ruled in favor of Peggy Young to reverse the lower court's decision and to have a trial, after she sued UPS under the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act, for failure to provide pregnancy accommodatcourt decisions, including the March 25 Supreme Court ruling on Young vs United Parcel Service (UPS), which ruled in favor of Peggy Young to reverse the lower court's decision and to have a trial, after she sued UPS under the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act, for failure to provide pregnancy accommodatCourt ruling on Young vs United Parcel Service (UPS), which ruled in favor of Peggy Young to reverse the lower court's decision and to have a trial, after she sued UPS under the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act, for failure to provide pregnancy accommodatcourt's decision and to have a trial, after she sued UPS under the federal Pregnancy Discrimination Act, for failure to provide pregnancy accommodfederal Pregnancy Discrimination Act, for failure to provide pregnancy accommodations.

Grandparents, cousins and similarly close relations of people in the United States should not be prevented from coming to the country under Trump's travel ban, a federal appeals court has ruled in another legal defeat for the administration on the contentious issue.

A federal appeals court on Monday upheld the bribery conviction of former Brooklyn Assemblyman William Boyland Jr. — despite acknowledging that some of the jury instructions at his trial were technically wrong under the new rules.

The residents in question are entitled to Medicaid coverage under state court rulings, but ineligible for federal Medicaid funding (mostly because they have been in the country less than five years).

On March 30th, a federal court ruled that parts of Act 10, Gov. Walker's union - busting law, were unconstitutional under the U.S. constitution.

The appellate ruling is part of a multipronged court battle between Tinari forces and dissidents who say the party is still under the control of ex-Conservative chairman Edward Walsh, who is in federal prison after his conviction on corruption charges.

The announcement of the new party line comes weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court, citing religious rights, ruled that requiring family - owned corporations to pay for insurance coverage for contraception under the Affordable Care Act violated a federal law protecting religious freedom.

«However, since the federal government continues to proclaim loudly that it operates under the rule of law it can not be operated to treat court orders with disdain.

ALBANY — A federal appeals court ruled Monday that former Brooklyn Assemblyman William Boyland Jr.'s corruption conviction should stand even though the jury instructions at his trial may have been improper under a 2016 Supreme Court decicourt ruled Monday that former Brooklyn Assemblyman William Boyland Jr.'s corruption conviction should stand even though the jury instructions at his trial may have been improper under a 2016 Supreme Court deciCourt decision.

«Federal prosecutors had conceded that under a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last summer, a federal honest services prosecution must include specific allegations of a bribe or kickback, which Bruno's case did not.Federal prosecutors had conceded that under a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last summer, a federal honest services prosecution must include specific allegations of a bribe or kickback, which Bruno's case did not.federal honest services prosecution must include specific allegations of a bribe or kickback, which Bruno's case did not.»

But in her motion challenging the EFCC's ex parte application, Mrs. Jonathan, through her lawyers, argued that the EFCC's «Ex parte Originating Summons» was not one of the modes of commencement of action under Order 3, Rule 1 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure Rules) 2009, and that it was not known or provided for by any law or rules of cCourt (Civil Procedure Rules) 2009, and that it was not known or provided for by any law or rules of cRules) 2009, and that it was not known or provided for by any law or rules of crules of courtcourt.

The proposed legislation is in response to a federal court ruling in Washington state that determined the amount of manure disposed of at certain farms in that state exceeded limits under solid waste law, according to the National Milk Producers Federation.

Does this ruling by the Supreme Court put paid to the supposition even in Akwa Ibom that the nation's judiciary is under the President Muhammadu Buhari APC - led Federal Government?

«Court - Appointed Experts: Defining the Role of Experts Appointed Under Federal Rule of Evidence 706,» Federal Judicial Center, 1993).

In Guitierrez - Brizuela v. Lynch, a 2016 immigration case, Gorsuch waved a red flag against the «Chevron deference» — a doctrine under which courts are supposed to defer to federal agencies on interpretations of rules that developed from a 1984 decision, Chevron v. National Resources Defense Council.

A separate EPA rule finalized last year aims to slash methane emissions from new facilities and is now under review in federal court.

In September 2010, The New York Times reported that the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that federal funding of embryonic stem cell research could continue under the new rules while the court considers Judge Lamberth's ruling [source: New York TiCourt of Appeals ruled that federal funding of embryonic stem cell research could continue under the new rules while the court considers Judge Lamberth's ruling [source: New York Ticourt considers Judge Lamberth's ruling [source: New York Times].

Additionally, a recent Supreme Court ruling determined that professional licensing boards (e.g. Dietetics boards and their members) are now liable under federal law, and may be prosecuted and sued for civil damages for anti-competitive actions.

U.S. District Judge George W. White ruled last month that a federal court order that placed the district under state control will be lifted on Sept. 9.

The Bush administration has joined with a California school district and others in calling for a federal appeals court to reverse the June ruling that the inclusion of «under God» in the Pledge of Allegiance runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution.

A coach who alleged school district retaliation for his complaints about unequal treatment of his girls» high school basketball team had no right to sue under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, a federal appeals court has ruled.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined last week to review a federal appeals court's ruling that a Texas teacher who resigned under pressure should have been granted an administrative hearing before his resignation took efCourt declined last week to review a federal appeals court's ruling that a Texas teacher who resigned under pressure should have been granted an administrative hearing before his resignation took efcourt's ruling that a Texas teacher who resigned under pressure should have been granted an administrative hearing before his resignation took effect.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today that parents have their own broad, enforceable rights under federal special education law, and thus they may represent themselves in federal court without the assistance of a laCourt ruled today that parents have their own broad, enforceable rights under federal special education law, and thus they may represent themselves in federal court without the assistance of a lacourt without the assistance of a lawyer.

However, this effort failed in 1973 as a result of the Supreme Court's ruling in San Antonio v. Rodriquez that such claims did not have a basis under federal equal protection laws.

Lawyers for the state of Ohio last month asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to overturn a federal district court's ruling that expanded the state's responsibility to fund school desegregation in Lorain County under the terms of a consent deCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to overturn a federal district court's ruling that expanded the state's responsibility to fund school desegregation in Lorain County under the terms of a consent decourt's ruling that expanded the state's responsibility to fund school desegregation in Lorain County under the terms of a consent decree.

But on the opening day of its new term, the high court let stand a federal appeals court ruling that said districts in most instances can not be held liable for so - called peer harassment under Title IX of...

If state courts rule that the amendment requires that religious students and institutions be treated differently than secular ones, as Martinez's ruling seems to imply, it could potentially raise a federal challenge under both the First and Fourteenth Amendments as a violation of free exercise and equal protection.

• Commitment to federal laws established by Supreme Court rulings: OCR's current reading of its authority under Title IX goes beyond the narrow interpretation adopted by the Supreme Court in two decisions that addressed the sexual harassment issue, even explicitly rejecting the rulings in guidelines issued under the Clinton administration.

A teacher's selection of a controversial play for students is not protected speech under the First Amendment, a divided federal appeals court has ruled.

A Florida federal court has ruled that a GMC dealership has standing under the state's franchise law to bring suit against General Motors for forcing the dealership's sale by den... Read more

All bankruptcy cases are handled in federal courts under rules outlined in the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.