Sentences with phrase «intermediate appellate court decisions»

One of several intermediate appellate court decisions to cite Cruz decided in the months immediately following was handed down only eight days later, People v. Cage, 2013 IL App (2d) 111264.

Not exact matches

[37] The governor's directive was purportedly based upon a decision from a New York intermediate appellate court.

West Virginia's poor showing, something it has gotten quite used to over the years, was again largely attributed to its unique status as the only state with no intermediate appellate court, and thus no automatic appeal rights from the decision of a trial court.

511, 873 P. 2d 413 (1994), a decision by an intermediate appellate court, in which the defendant does not appear to have objected to the trial court's instructions as inaccurate, incomplete, or insufficient, for failure to inform the jury concerning a statutorily mandated $ 500,000 cap on noneconomic damages.

An intermediate state appellate court upheld the judgment in a split decision, and Wal - Mart continued the litigation to the Texas Supreme Court in Wal - Mart Stores Inc. v. Johcourt upheld the judgment in a split decision, and Wal - Mart continued the litigation to the Texas Supreme Court in Wal - Mart Stores Inc. v. JohCourt in Wal - Mart Stores Inc. v. Johnson.

We have to say that our California intermediate appellate courts get interesting fees decisions to consider, some head scratching in nature but interesting nonetheless.

Ford appealed to the intermediate appellate court, which reversed the trial court's decision and voided the increase in damages.

In a 4 - 3 decision, the Kentucky Supreme Court agreed with the intermediate appellate court that overturned the trial court's directed verCourt agreed with the intermediate appellate court that overturned the trial court's directed vercourt that overturned the trial court's directed vercourt's directed verdict.

In a recent decision of the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, Maryland's intermediate appellate court addressed the question of whether a New York resident could be subject to personal jurisdiction in a Maryland paternity and support action based on his filing of an answer to the original complaint for custody, his request for genetic testing, and his request for discoCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland, Maryland's intermediate appellate court addressed the question of whether a New York resident could be subject to personal jurisdiction in a Maryland paternity and support action based on his filing of an answer to the original complaint for custody, his request for genetic testing, and his request for discocourt addressed the question of whether a New York resident could be subject to personal jurisdiction in a Maryland paternity and support action based on his filing of an answer to the original complaint for custody, his request for genetic testing, and his request for discovery.

Within each state, that state's supreme court decisions appear first, decisions of intermediate appellate courts next, and decisions of trial courts appear last.

Conventional wisdom in most jurisdictions holds that unless the intermediate appellate court's decision was published with a dissent, it's not worth seeking Supreme Court recourt's decision was published with a dissent, it's not worth seeking Supreme Court reCourt review.

On May 6, 2016, the North Carolina Supreme Court released a deadlocked 3 - 3 decision, leaving the intermediate appellate decision undisturbed without precedential value.

In 2013, she successfully argued for reversal by the New York State Court of Appeals of an adverse decision by an intermediate appellate court in a lease interpretation matter, thereby obtaining dismissal of the suit in its entirety against her clCourt of Appeals of an adverse decision by an intermediate appellate court in a lease interpretation matter, thereby obtaining dismissal of the suit in its entirety against her clcourt in a lease interpretation matter, thereby obtaining dismissal of the suit in its entirety against her client.

This unique rule dates from a time when the California Supreme Court reviewed trial court decisions de novo, so that its agreeing to hear a case effectively nullified the prior opinion of the intermediate appellate court in the maCourt reviewed trial court decisions de novo, so that its agreeing to hear a case effectively nullified the prior opinion of the intermediate appellate court in the macourt decisions de novo, so that its agreeing to hear a case effectively nullified the prior opinion of the intermediate appellate court in the macourt in the matter.

Since the state's Law Reporting Bureaus oversees the publication of decisions of New York's intermediate appellate courts and some trial decisions as well that manual guides the writing of judges throughout the state and indirectly influences the citation practices of lawyers submitting memoranda and briefs to them.