Sentences with phrase «first federal appeals court»

According to The Third Branch, the federal courts newsletter, it is the first federal appeals court to offer RSS feeds.

Not exact matches

EPA first tried to ban the use of asbestos in 1989, but its decision was struck down two years later by a federal appeals court that ruled the agency had exceeded its authority.

Jan. 17, 2014: First of 10 applications filed in Federal Court and the Federal Appeal Court by environmental and First Nations groups seeking judicial review of panel recommendation to approve project.

The opinion, issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, strikes down a legislative provision, first enacted in 1986 and renewed numerous times since, which sets a goal that 5 percent of federal defense contracting dollars each fiscal year must be awarded to certain entities, including small disadvantaged comFederal Circuit, strikes down a legislative provision, first enacted in 1986 and renewed numerous times since, which sets a goal that 5 percent of federal defense contracting dollars each fiscal year must be awarded to certain entities, including small disadvantaged comfederal defense contracting dollars each fiscal year must be awarded to certain entities, including small disadvantaged companies.

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.

A federal appeals court on May 31st ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional because it denies equal rights for legally married same - sex couples, making it likely that the Supreme Court will consider the politically divisive issue for the first time in its next court on May 31st ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional because it denies equal rights for legally married same - sex couples, making it likely that the Supreme Court will consider the politically divisive issue for the first time in its next Court will consider the politically divisive issue for the first time in its next term.

A federal appeals court ruled for the first time that the 1964 Civil Rights Act protects LGBT employees from workplace discrimination, setting up a likely battle before the Supreme Court as gay rights advocates push to broaden the scope of the 53 - year - oldcourt ruled for the first time that the 1964 Civil Rights Act protects LGBT employees from workplace discrimination, setting up a likely battle before the Supreme Court as gay rights advocates push to broaden the scope of the 53 - year - oldCourt as gay rights advocates push to broaden the scope of the 53 - year - old law.

Although gay marriage advocates have had the upper hand in the legal battle over the past year, the landscape changed last week when a Cincinnati - based regional federal appeals court became the first to uphold gay marriage bans.

Bruno was convicted at his first trial in Albany but appealed on the basis of a Supreme Court decision that narrowed the federal honest services statute.

In addition, the Department of Justice has dismissed its appeal of the Seattle federal court ruling that suspended the first order (13769) on Tuesday.

The U.S. Department of Justice on Tuesday said it would voluntarily dismiss its own appeal of a Seattle federal court ruling that had suspended President Donald Trump's first executive order concerning travel from seven Muslim - majority countries.

The California law, adopted first, faced two court challenges from SOCE practitioners on the grounds that it violated their free speech rights, but last August a federal appeals court upheld the statute, distinguishing between the rights practitioners enjoy to advocate for the practice in public debate and the limitations on the therapeutic practices they can employ in their professional conduct governed by state licensing.

A federal appeals panel has agreed to first let the former Assembly Speaker take his case to the U.S. Supreme Court before scheduling a retrial of his corruption case.

UC announced yesterday that it is the first research institution to seek to «intervene,» or become a party in the case, in which the government is appealing a lower court's ruling that National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding to study human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) violates federal law.

Bruce M. Selya is a senior federal judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and has enjoyed a celebrated law career.

Actually, make that eight, since Justice Thurgood Marshall (Danny Glover, «Mandela») recused himself because he was the Solicitor General when the case was first appealed to federal court.

A Williamsport, Pa., student group was joined by the Reagan Administration in urging the Court to review a federal appeals court's July 1984 ruling that such meetings are prohibited by the establishment clause of the First AmendCourt to review a federal appeals court's July 1984 ruling that such meetings are prohibited by the establishment clause of the First Amendcourt's July 1984 ruling that such meetings are prohibited by the establishment clause of the First Amendment.

The shift in policy was upheld by the Maine Supreme Court on First Amendment grounds in 1999 and subsequently confirmed by a federal appellate court, with the Supreme Court refusing to hear an apCourt on First Amendment grounds in 1999 and subsequently confirmed by a federal appellate court, with the Supreme Court refusing to hear an apcourt, with the Supreme Court refusing to hear an apCourt refusing to hear an appeal.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit upholds the constitutionality of the «off the top» funding method used to allocate Chapter 1 aid to pupils in church - affiliated schools; it is the first appellate court to rule on the question, on which federal district courts have been divCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit upholds the constitutionality of the «off the top» funding method used to allocate Chapter 1 aid to pupils in church - affiliated schools; it is the first appellate court to rule on the question, on which federal district courts have been divcourt to rule on the question, on which federal district courts have been divided.

The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in David D. v. Dartmouth School Committee also allows state education officials to be challenged in federal court on the basis of state standard andCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit in David D. v. Dartmouth School Committee also allows state education officials to be challenged in federal court on the basis of state standard andcourt on the basis of state standard and law.

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.

The parents of a child with severe physical and mental handicaps have appealed a federal - court decision that is believed to be the first to declare a child ineligible to receive special - education services because he is not «capable of benefiting» from them.

The appeals court first agreed with the trial court that the voucher programs did not run violate the Religion Clause, citing two Arizona Supreme Court cases, Community Council v. Jordan, 432 P. 2d 460 (Ariz. 1967), andKotterman v. Killian, 972 P. 2d 606 (1999), that suggested that Arizona's Religion Clause was «virtually indistinguishable from the United States Supreme Court's interpretation of the federal Establishment Clause.&rcourt first agreed with the trial court that the voucher programs did not run violate the Religion Clause, citing two Arizona Supreme Court cases, Community Council v. Jordan, 432 P. 2d 460 (Ariz. 1967), andKotterman v. Killian, 972 P. 2d 606 (1999), that suggested that Arizona's Religion Clause was «virtually indistinguishable from the United States Supreme Court's interpretation of the federal Establishment Clause.&rcourt that the voucher programs did not run violate the Religion Clause, citing two Arizona Supreme Court cases, Community Council v. Jordan, 432 P. 2d 460 (Ariz. 1967), andKotterman v. Killian, 972 P. 2d 606 (1999), that suggested that Arizona's Religion Clause was «virtually indistinguishable from the United States Supreme Court's interpretation of the federal Establishment Clause.&rCourt cases, Community Council v. Jordan, 432 P. 2d 460 (Ariz. 1967), andKotterman v. Killian, 972 P. 2d 606 (1999), that suggested that Arizona's Religion Clause was «virtually indistinguishable from the United States Supreme Court's interpretation of the federal Establishment Clause.&rCourt's interpretation of the federal Establishment Clause.»

For now, all federal courts of appeal except the First and Eighth Circuits have adopted the Brunner test.

That shift was made possible by the 1965 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals decision, which, for the first time, granted environmental litigants standing to sue in federal cCourt of Appeals decision, which, for the first time, granted environmental litigants standing to sue in federal courtcourt.

GRANTS PASS, Ore. (AP)-- A federal appeals court ruled Friday that bloggers and the public have the same First Amendment protections as journalists when sued for defamation: If the issue is of public concern, plaintiffs have to prove negligence to win damages.

Cathy Cash, senior editor, discusses a case before the appeals court, Coalition for Responsible Regulation versus EPA, which consolidates four major challenges to the federal government's ability to tackle greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources for the first time.

In allowing the appeal in Canada (Governor General in Council) v. Mikisew Cree First Nation, [2017] 3 FCR 298, 2016 FCA 311, the Federal Court of Appeal held that while federal ministers have executive powers in their responsibilities for their departments pursuant to statues, those statutes do not refer to the ministers» roles as policy - makers or to the development of legislation for introduction in Parliappeal in Canada (Governor General in Council) v. Mikisew Cree First Nation, [2017] 3 FCR 298, 2016 FCA 311, the Federal Court of Appeal held that while federal ministers have executive powers in their responsibilities for their departments pursuant to statues, those statutes do not refer to the ministers» roles as policy - makers or to the development of legislation for introduction in ParlFederal Court of Appeal held that while federal ministers have executive powers in their responsibilities for their departments pursuant to statues, those statutes do not refer to the ministers» roles as policy - makers or to the development of legislation for introduction in ParliAppeal held that while federal ministers have executive powers in their responsibilities for their departments pursuant to statues, those statutes do not refer to the ministers» roles as policy - makers or to the development of legislation for introduction in Parlfederal ministers have executive powers in their responsibilities for their departments pursuant to statues, those statutes do not refer to the ministers» roles as policy - makers or to the development of legislation for introduction in Parliament.

At times, people have questioned whether in at least some cases, parties should be able to appeal prothonotary decisions directly to the Federal Court of Appeal, rather than first to a single judge of the Federal appeal prothonotary decisions directly to the Federal Court of Appeal, rather than first to a single judge of the Federal Appeal, rather than first to a single judge of the Federal Court.

The defendant appealed, first to a judge of the Federal Court, who had upheld the prothonotary's decision.

The National Law Journal today reports that the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has launched its own wiki, a first for the federal judiciary.

At the Federal Court of Appeal, the essential elements of the Federal Court disposition with regard to required accessibility were confirmed even though some elements of the first instance decision were varied, especially to remove the declaration of infringement by the government and the disposition to the effect that the Federal Court was keeping jurisdiction to ensure the effect of its declaration (Canada (Attorney General) v. Jodhan, 2012 FCA 161 (CanLII)-RRB-.

Davis had exhausted his first round of federal appeals and was turned down by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals when he sought permission to file a second federal appeals and was turned down by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals when he sought permission to file a second federal Appeals when he sought permission to file a second federal appeal.

Mr. Regan frequently represents parties in construction disputes in the state and federal courts of Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New York, and he has argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and the Connecticut Supreme Court.

Dealing first with the direct discrimination claim, the Federal Court of Appeal did not apply the Withler test for discrimination upon the ground of family status, as was advanced by Mr. Grenon (at para 6).

On appeal, Esso argued that he was denied a fair trial when the district court allowed the jury to take home the copy of the indictment — an issue that the Second Circuit said appeared to be one of first impression in any federal or state court.

In the U.S., a criminal defendant can not raise the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel on a direct appeal of a conviction or sentence, but can raise it in a collateral attack on a conviction which must be brought first in the state court and if that remedy is exhausted, may then be brought in federal court.

As noted in a recent case at the British Columbia Court of Appeal, the offender, a long - time drug addict, began his addiction to illicit drugs during his first term of imprisonment at a federal penitentiary.

In 1998, a federal appeals court held for the first time that arson testimony is subject to the Daubert standard of reliability that applies to other forms of scientific expertise.

Current opposition to the project includes six First Nations litigants at the Canadian Federal Court of Appeals, 150 Nations, Tribes, and Bands from Canada and the United States (Treaty Alliance Against Tar Sands Expansion), the province of British Columbia, the state of Washington, 22 BC municipalities, 300,000 petition signers, and more than 24,000 people who have pledged to do «whatever it takes to stop Kinder Morgan.»

Tufts is an experienced trial attorney who handles business litigation, including state and federal trials as first chair, and appeals before the Utah Supreme Court and Court of Aappeals before the Utah Supreme Court and Court of AppealsAppeals.

The BC Supreme Court and Canadian Federal Court of Appeals have yet to rule on ten First Nation lawsuits that could still quash the project.

David W. Tufts is an experienced trial attorney who has handled a broad array of business litigation matters, including state and federal trials as first chair and appeals before the Utah Supreme Court and Court of Aappeals before the Utah Supreme Court and Court of AppealsAppeals.

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia: John Paul Stevens leaves behind a distinguished career of service on the federal bench, first on the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and then, for the last 34 years, on this Court.

His former girlfriend, Angela Johnson, who is also appealing her death sentence, is the first woman sentenced to death in the federal court system in more than 50 years.

Arguably, the Federal Court of Appeal's decision to show limited deference to the Tribunal, and its unwillingness to decide issues related to the colony's liability, presents future obstacles in the way of First Nations seeking to resolve their site - specific claims.

He is an experienced trial attorney who has handled a broad array of business litigation matters, including state and federal trials as first chair, and appeals before the Utah Supreme Court and Court of Aappeals before the Utah Supreme Court and Court of AppealsAppeals.

The case presents two procedural issues under the AIA trial format: First, whether the PTAB should construe claims during an IPR using the USPTO's «broadest reasonable interpretation» (or «BRI») construction standard; and second, whether the PTAB's decision to institute review is subject to review by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

The TransCanada decision came only a few days after the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal ordering the federal government to renegotiate the terms under which the Trans Mountain pipeline crosses a First Nations reserve in British Columbia, raising new questions about the fate of Kinder Morgan Inc.'s federally approved plan to expand the piFederal Court of Appeal ordering the federal government to renegotiate the terms under which the Trans Mountain pipeline crosses a First Nations reserve in British Columbia, raising new questions about the fate of Kinder Morgan Inc.'s federally approved plan to expand the pifederal government to renegotiate the terms under which the Trans Mountain pipeline crosses a First Nations reserve in British Columbia, raising new questions about the fate of Kinder Morgan Inc.'s federally approved plan to expand the pipeline.

But «a judge reduced the award to $ 5 million, then the federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., threw out the verdict altogether as barred by the church's First Amendment rights.»