Sentences with phrase «decision in a case called»

Here's why: Litigator, law writing prof and recovering broadcast journalist Williams read the 9th Circuit Court's decision to reverse immigration judge Nathan Gordon's decision in a case called de Leon v. Gonzales.

Quoting from another decision in a case called Public Trustee of British Columbia (Price Estate) v. Price, the court reiterated:

Not exact matches

The plaintiffs» motion states that in June 14 and 15 conference calls, counsel for the three sets of plaintiffs stated that they supported coordination or consolidation, «subject to the parties» agreement that these three cases will retain their separate identities, allowing each set of plaintiffs to file separate briefs, make separate oral arguments, and independently make other litigation decisions.»

As I've argued before, what we commonly call «loopholes» are in most cases the result of some decision by government to encourage or discourage a particular behaviour.

The results of these and other Supreme Court decisions call to mind the warning issued by Justice Arthur I Goldberg (no Moral Majoritarian, he) some 25 years ago in the School Prayer Cases.

Yahweh in hebrew means my Lord and is a common reference meaning supreme God.In the bible satan is referred specifically as the adversary in hebrew or slanderer in greek its quite clear there is no confusion.Satan is not in the same league as God he is sovereign in fact God has satan on a leash and limits his control particularly over his people as we read in Job.Christians need to realise that satan can influence us if we walk according to the flesh.In the case of David calling a cencus meant he gave in to his pride he wanted to know how many soldiers he had believing numbers would give him the upper hand and so Satan took advantage of his weakness and Davids choice displeased God.David of all people should have known as he as a young man had defeated goliath a mighty warrior and it was because of his faith and trust in God that he overcame.But it wasnt God that made David make that decision it was his own and satan tempted him and he gave in to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that wain hebrew means my Lord and is a common reference meaning supreme God.In the bible satan is referred specifically as the adversary in hebrew or slanderer in greek its quite clear there is no confusion.Satan is not in the same league as God he is sovereign in fact God has satan on a leash and limits his control particularly over his people as we read in Job.Christians need to realise that satan can influence us if we walk according to the flesh.In the case of David calling a cencus meant he gave in to his pride he wanted to know how many soldiers he had believing numbers would give him the upper hand and so Satan took advantage of his weakness and Davids choice displeased God.David of all people should have known as he as a young man had defeated goliath a mighty warrior and it was because of his faith and trust in God that he overcame.But it wasnt God that made David make that decision it was his own and satan tempted him and he gave in to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that waIn the bible satan is referred specifically as the adversary in hebrew or slanderer in greek its quite clear there is no confusion.Satan is not in the same league as God he is sovereign in fact God has satan on a leash and limits his control particularly over his people as we read in Job.Christians need to realise that satan can influence us if we walk according to the flesh.In the case of David calling a cencus meant he gave in to his pride he wanted to know how many soldiers he had believing numbers would give him the upper hand and so Satan took advantage of his weakness and Davids choice displeased God.David of all people should have known as he as a young man had defeated goliath a mighty warrior and it was because of his faith and trust in God that he overcame.But it wasnt God that made David make that decision it was his own and satan tempted him and he gave in to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that wain hebrew or slanderer in greek its quite clear there is no confusion.Satan is not in the same league as God he is sovereign in fact God has satan on a leash and limits his control particularly over his people as we read in Job.Christians need to realise that satan can influence us if we walk according to the flesh.In the case of David calling a cencus meant he gave in to his pride he wanted to know how many soldiers he had believing numbers would give him the upper hand and so Satan took advantage of his weakness and Davids choice displeased God.David of all people should have known as he as a young man had defeated goliath a mighty warrior and it was because of his faith and trust in God that he overcame.But it wasnt God that made David make that decision it was his own and satan tempted him and he gave in to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that wain greek its quite clear there is no confusion.Satan is not in the same league as God he is sovereign in fact God has satan on a leash and limits his control particularly over his people as we read in Job.Christians need to realise that satan can influence us if we walk according to the flesh.In the case of David calling a cencus meant he gave in to his pride he wanted to know how many soldiers he had believing numbers would give him the upper hand and so Satan took advantage of his weakness and Davids choice displeased God.David of all people should have known as he as a young man had defeated goliath a mighty warrior and it was because of his faith and trust in God that he overcame.But it wasnt God that made David make that decision it was his own and satan tempted him and he gave in to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that wain the same league as God he is sovereign in fact God has satan on a leash and limits his control particularly over his people as we read in Job.Christians need to realise that satan can influence us if we walk according to the flesh.In the case of David calling a cencus meant he gave in to his pride he wanted to know how many soldiers he had believing numbers would give him the upper hand and so Satan took advantage of his weakness and Davids choice displeased God.David of all people should have known as he as a young man had defeated goliath a mighty warrior and it was because of his faith and trust in God that he overcame.But it wasnt God that made David make that decision it was his own and satan tempted him and he gave in to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that wain fact God has satan on a leash and limits his control particularly over his people as we read in Job.Christians need to realise that satan can influence us if we walk according to the flesh.In the case of David calling a cencus meant he gave in to his pride he wanted to know how many soldiers he had believing numbers would give him the upper hand and so Satan took advantage of his weakness and Davids choice displeased God.David of all people should have known as he as a young man had defeated goliath a mighty warrior and it was because of his faith and trust in God that he overcame.But it wasnt God that made David make that decision it was his own and satan tempted him and he gave in to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that wain Job.Christians need to realise that satan can influence us if we walk according to the flesh.In the case of David calling a cencus meant he gave in to his pride he wanted to know how many soldiers he had believing numbers would give him the upper hand and so Satan took advantage of his weakness and Davids choice displeased God.David of all people should have known as he as a young man had defeated goliath a mighty warrior and it was because of his faith and trust in God that he overcame.But it wasnt God that made David make that decision it was his own and satan tempted him and he gave in to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that waIn the case of David calling a cencus meant he gave in to his pride he wanted to know how many soldiers he had believing numbers would give him the upper hand and so Satan took advantage of his weakness and Davids choice displeased God.David of all people should have known as he as a young man had defeated goliath a mighty warrior and it was because of his faith and trust in God that he overcame.But it wasnt God that made David make that decision it was his own and satan tempted him and he gave in to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that wain to his pride he wanted to know how many soldiers he had believing numbers would give him the upper hand and so Satan took advantage of his weakness and Davids choice displeased God.David of all people should have known as he as a young man had defeated goliath a mighty warrior and it was because of his faith and trust in God that he overcame.But it wasnt God that made David make that decision it was his own and satan tempted him and he gave in to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that wain God that he overcame.But it wasnt God that made David make that decision it was his own and satan tempted him and he gave in to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that wain to that desire In the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that waIn the two verses there is no confusion if you understand how God and satan operate i did at one stage have the same issue with Jesus sending the demons into the pigs why would he help satan or at least it appeared that way?

In this case, we can be sure that redistribution of wealth through political means will become a crucial issue in our society and will call for a decision from all of uIn this case, we can be sure that redistribution of wealth through political means will become a crucial issue in our society and will call for a decision from all of uin our society and will call for a decision from all of us.

Questions of calling were being played out among people who in some cases pieced together two or three part - time jobs, and who, with less time for leisure and contemplation, were making ethical and moral decisions that rendered absurd our late - night conversations at the student coffee shop.

The cause of the choir's mournful tune is the Supreme Court's decision in the so - called peyote case, Employment Division v. Smith.

This decision — I'm still calling it 5 - 4 in favor of Hobby Lobby — is a direct result of Citizens United (the Corporations Are People case), and indeed allows anyone to use religious objections as a magic phrase to allow anyone to break any law they like...

As individuals demonstrated their ability to administer such matters, they would more and more be relied on; but the congregation as a whole would be expected to determine policy at every point and often, no doubt, would be called on to make ad hoc decisions in questionable cases.

According to the joint statement, the so - called «high - def TV» Decision played no role in Woods» case and «should not be viewed as a general precedent for relaxing or ignoring a competitor's essential obligation under the Rules to return a correct scorecard.»

David Howman, director general of the World Anti-Doping Agency, called those court's decisions in the Caucchioli and Pellizotti cases «a significant step in the global fight against doping in sport.»

Although Elia has declined to comment on the case, her spokeswoman has indicated the education department is reviewing its options in case she is called on to make a decision.

We call on President Nana Akufo - Addo to direct a reversal of these illegal decisions and acts of malfeasance as well as take appropriate steps to restore good corporate governance practices in our state - owned enterprises, in this case ADB.

«That decision put thousands of perspective graduates in a bad spot and in many cases actually put their graduation into jeopardy,» Bloomberg told reporters at a press conference at Tweed Courthouse called to announce the plan.

«Regardless how today's United States Supreme Court decision on the so - called «honest services» law is interpreted in Senator Bruno's case and going forward, the Legislature and the Governor must act this legislative session to toughen ethics oversight.

This further undermines the case - if proof was needed - that the PM was being less than honest when he said that opinion polls were not a factor in his decision to call the election off.

The report highlighted one case in point in which scientific evidence was overlooked: a decision by the U.K. government's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) in May of this year to grant its first license for a homeopathic medicine called arnica.

In every case, those who experienced awe behaved in what psychologists call a more «prosocial» way, being more helpful or making more ethical decisionIn every case, those who experienced awe behaved in what psychologists call a more «prosocial» way, being more helpful or making more ethical decisionin what psychologists call a more «prosocial» way, being more helpful or making more ethical decisions.

Early reaction from major players include the following: The New York Times called Vergara «a decision that hands teachers» unions a major defeat in a landmark case.»

They described repeated suspensions, multiple daily phone calls and frequent demands to pick their children up from school early, which made their lives difficult and in some cases contributed to their decisions to leave.

Yet as LeWitt moved from making systemic objects to wall drawings and eventually what can only be called murals, his use of plans, diagrams, and instructions emphasized the ideas that circumscribed his work and the nature of those decisions that constitute an artist's taste and aesthetic vision — or in LeWitt's case, those of the people hired to execute his work.

Environmental activists have launched an urgent appeal calling for a «just decision» in a court case that has pitted Aceh's...

Instead, the case dragged on for two years; the docket sheet has around 80 entries; both sides hired computer experts, and in the end the case was dismissed on summary judgment, in a decision where the judge spent almost 40 pages analyzing every claim made by Healthcare and dismissing it only after rigorous and in - depth analysis which went, in my opinion, far beyond the call of duty.

The decisions of the courts, called case law, are the authoritative guide to the application of the law in particular fact situations.

However, trials often call for creativity in the absence of clear guidance, and anyone considering taking legal action to redress an injury should consider finding counsel capable of making informed, calculated decisions in order to best present the case.

Justice Stratas indicates, in the spirit of this article, that legislative words matter and that there are many contextual factors which might provide that a presumption of deferential review (or reasonableness, whatever we want to call it), is rebutted, and a narrower margin must be accepted: for example, «statutory recipes that must be followed,» statutory purposes, settled case law, discretionary decisions, and importantly, clear statutory language.

The second was a decision of the SCC in a case called Will - Kare Paving that hung, in part, on the meaning of the word «sale».

A ten - minute phone call to the right person should help you learn everything you need to know in order to make a thumbs up or thumbs down decision on the case.

In my opinion the ECJ's decision in Taricco I that national courts must disapply the rules of statutes of limitations if they prevent Member States from fulfilling their obligations under Article 325 TFEU (in the present case, the relevant Italian legislation) leads to perceiving serious fraud as a crime against the rights and interests of citizens, i.e., against fundamental social human rights guaranteed under Articles 2 and 3 of the Italian Constitution, and hence calls for resolving the conflict within the Italian Constitution by balancing the rights under these articles and the accused's individual rights guaranteed by the legality principle (Art. 25 (2) Const.In my opinion the ECJ's decision in Taricco I that national courts must disapply the rules of statutes of limitations if they prevent Member States from fulfilling their obligations under Article 325 TFEU (in the present case, the relevant Italian legislation) leads to perceiving serious fraud as a crime against the rights and interests of citizens, i.e., against fundamental social human rights guaranteed under Articles 2 and 3 of the Italian Constitution, and hence calls for resolving the conflict within the Italian Constitution by balancing the rights under these articles and the accused's individual rights guaranteed by the legality principle (Art. 25 (2) Const.in Taricco I that national courts must disapply the rules of statutes of limitations if they prevent Member States from fulfilling their obligations under Article 325 TFEU (in the present case, the relevant Italian legislation) leads to perceiving serious fraud as a crime against the rights and interests of citizens, i.e., against fundamental social human rights guaranteed under Articles 2 and 3 of the Italian Constitution, and hence calls for resolving the conflict within the Italian Constitution by balancing the rights under these articles and the accused's individual rights guaranteed by the legality principle (Art. 25 (2) Const.in the present case, the relevant Italian legislation) leads to perceiving serious fraud as a crime against the rights and interests of citizens, i.e., against fundamental social human rights guaranteed under Articles 2 and 3 of the Italian Constitution, and hence calls for resolving the conflict within the Italian Constitution by balancing the rights under these articles and the accused's individual rights guaranteed by the legality principle (Art. 25 (2) Const.).

The majority decision of the justice of the United Kingdom Supreme Court may be set to become the «final statement» on the presence of EU law in the UK constitutional order in both senses of the word: the Miller case may well prove to be chronologically the final time that the UK's highest court is called upon to interpret the nature of EU law before the United Kingdom's putative withdrawal from the European Union; in the other sense of the word, the dicta in the case may serve to be the final and definitive statement in an ongoing 40 year constitutional saga initiated by the United Kingdom's accession to the European Union's predecessor in 1973.

In a recent case called Colley v. Colley, Mr. Justice Quinn — who has an established history of writing interesting decisions as judge for the Ontario Superior Court of Justice — expressed some healthy scepticism at the story by a wife who was now living with another man.

The recent case of Elmore v (1) The Governors of Darland High School (2) Wrexham County Borough Council UKEAT / 0209/16 / DM demonstrates that it is not always necessary to call the final decision maker to give evidence in an unfair dismissal claim.

When this personal injury decision came out awarding $ 36,042.30 I called it A Case Study into What Not to Do in an ICBC Injury Claim.

In Canada, courts generally recognize that the well - being of a child is fundamentally interrelated with the well - being of the custodial parent; indeed, a 1996 Supreme Court of Canada ruling in a case called Gordon v. Goertz established conclusively that judges must apply the «best interests of the child» test in making decisions about whether a parent should be allowed to relocate with a child, which in turn requires an individual, fact - specific assessmenIn Canada, courts generally recognize that the well - being of a child is fundamentally interrelated with the well - being of the custodial parent; indeed, a 1996 Supreme Court of Canada ruling in a case called Gordon v. Goertz established conclusively that judges must apply the «best interests of the child» test in making decisions about whether a parent should be allowed to relocate with a child, which in turn requires an individual, fact - specific assessmenin a case called Gordon v. Goertz established conclusively that judges must apply the «best interests of the child» test in making decisions about whether a parent should be allowed to relocate with a child, which in turn requires an individual, fact - specific assessmenin making decisions about whether a parent should be allowed to relocate with a child, which in turn requires an individual, fact - specific assessmenin turn requires an individual, fact - specific assessment.

This «style of cause» or «case name» as we call it, doesn't have to be unique in order to be specific: in any given legal context, the names of one or two main parties often suffice to refer to a decision, its full citation being used only in formal writings.

Critical to the decision of the Court of Appeal was the wording of cl 1 of the lease which set out the term granted in the following way: «from and including 1 January 2003 to 28 September 2004 (hereinafter called «the term» which expression shall include any period of holding over or extension of it whether by statute or at common law or by agreement)...» Rimmer LJ, who gave the only substantive judgment in the case, referred to the words in brackets in this clause as «the words of extension».

The National Post yesterday reported that the CRTC overturned its decision last year in the so - called «million dollar comma» case.

These include: United States v. Resendiz - Ponce, which presents the question whether the omission of an element from a federal indictment can constitute harmless error (9th Circuit says no); Global Crossing Telecommunications, Inc. v. Metrophones Telecommunications, Inc., on whether a provider of pay phone services can sue a long distance carrier for alleged violations of the Federal Communications Commission's regulations concerning compensation for coinless pay phone calls (9th Circuit says yes); Cunningham v. California, a sentencing case involving whether whether California's Determinate Sentencing Law violates the 6th and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution by permitting California state court judges at sentencing to impose enhanced sentenced based on their determination of facts neither found by the jury nor admitted by the defendant; and Carey v. Musladin, reviewing the 9th Circuit's decision to overturn a murder conviction of a defendant who claimed he was denied a fair trial because the victim's relatives appeared in court wearing buttons with the deceased's picture on them.

In a recent case called Regnier v. Regnier, the court considered a narrow issue: whether a wife's decision during the marriage to go back to school automatically meant that the husband suffered financial disadvantage, for which he should be compensated by way of spousal support....

Parenting coordination provides an alternative dispute resolution process whereby an impartial third person called a parenting coordinator assists the parties in developing or implementing their parenting plan by facilitating the resolution of disputes in high conflict cases, providing education and making recommendations to the parties, and, with the prior consent of the parties and approval of the court, making limited decisions within the scope of the order of referral.

Jeremy D. Morley, an expert in international family law who is not involved in the case, called the decision surprising.

As a firm blow to airlines trying to dodge the Sturgeon decision, AG Bot's opinion in the joined cases C - 581 / 10 and C - 629 / 10 has already been called a «Luxembourgian punch on the nose» and «a kick in the Bot».

Zivkovic Samardzic has announced its successful representation of Serbia's 021 broadcaster in a copyright infringement case resulting in what the firm calls «a landmark decision... reinterpret [ing] the current events exception in Serbian copyright law.»

Tremblay - Hall calls the decision to award costs «very rare; I don't think there's one other case in Ontario where... a cost award of such magnitude has ever been awarded against the Ministry of Natural Resources for a prosecution.

Dunsmuir called for this to happen through the increased use of precedent to determine whether an administrator's decision on a legal issue [2] should be treated deferentially or not, and though the identification of four kinds of legal questions to which the correctness standard would automatically apply [3]-- in either case, no standard of review analysis would be needed.

«Justices signal dismay at Texas; Decision to hear capital cases may suggest high court questions handling»: The Dallas Morning News today contains an article that begins, «The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear three Texas death penalty cases in its new term, a move that veteran court watchers called the latest signal of the court's increasing frustration with how condemned inmates» appeals are handled by Texas» highest criminal judges and the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.»

At issue is whether and to what extent a laches defense may bar a claim for damages in patent infringement brought within the Patent Act's six - year statutory limitations period, notwithstanding the Supreme Court's 2014 decision in «Petrella v. Metro - Goldwyn - Mayer,» 134 S. Ct. 1962 (2014)(the so - called «Raging Bull» case, so named because the lawsuit involved copyright issues surrounding the script for the 1980 Martin Scorsese film).

The ECJ's decision that national courts must disapply the rules of statutes of limitations if they prevent Member States from fulfilling their obligations under Article 325 TFEU (in the present case, the relevant Italian legislation) leads to perceiving serious fraud as a crime against the rights and interests of citizens, i.e., against fundamental social human rights guaranteed under Arts. 2 and 3 Const., and hence calls for resolving the conflict within the Italian Constitution by balancing the rights under these articles and the accused's individual rights guaranteed by the legality principle (Art. 25 Const.)