Sentences with phrase «landmark ruling in the case»

Not exact matches

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on two landmark cases impacting same - sex couples this week and their ability to marry (I am loathe to call it same - sex marriage or gay marriage because it's just marriage, no different than anyone else's marriage; the people in it just happen to be of the same sex).

In a case that could have wide - ranging national significance for gay rights, a federal appeals court in New York ruled that a landmark civil rights law bars employers from discriminating against their workers based on sexual orientatioIn a case that could have wide - ranging national significance for gay rights, a federal appeals court in New York ruled that a landmark civil rights law bars employers from discriminating against their workers based on sexual orientatioin New York ruled that a landmark civil rights law bars employers from discriminating against their workers based on sexual orientation.

The case, now being deliberated by a jury, is one of the first major public corruption trials in New York since a landmark 2016 Supreme Court ruling significantly narrowed the definition of what actually constitutes public corruption.

Among his numerous high - profile issues, McGuire helped win the landmark Silver v. Pataki case in which New York's highest court ruled legislators «may not alter» the language of a governor's budget proposal.

Gorsuch declined to say whether Roe vs. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court case that legalized abortion, was correctly decided more than four decades ago, but did say that if Trump had asked him to rule in a certain way involving Roe, «I would've walked out the door.

«Today's ruling affirms what millions of people across this country already know to be true in our hearts: Our love is equal,» said Jim Obergefell, the lead plaintiff in this landmark case.

In 2002, the school choice movement received one of its biggest victories when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in its landmark Zelman v. Simmons - Harris case declaring school voucher programs like those in Milwaukee, WI and Cleveland, OH constitutionaIn 2002, the school choice movement received one of its biggest victories when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in its landmark Zelman v. Simmons - Harris case declaring school voucher programs like those in Milwaukee, WI and Cleveland, OH constitutionain its landmark Zelman v. Simmons - Harris case declaring school voucher programs like those in Milwaukee, WI and Cleveland, OH constitutionain Milwaukee, WI and Cleveland, OH constitutional.

That plan stems from the 1974 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the landmark civil rights case, Lau v. Nichols, that ordered San Francisco's schools to provide Chinese children who didn't speak or understand English with a bridge to the curriculum.

Their false claims highlight the importance of remembering the facts in this case — the same facts that laid the ground for the landmark 2014 ruling in favor of the student plaintiffs and helped deliver a win for all of California's six million public school students.

Forget the 1954 landmark Supreme Court case of Brown v. Board of Education that ruled that segregation in schools violated the United States Constitution.

Forty - three years have passed since the U.S. Supreme Court narrowly ruled in the landmark San Antonio v. Rodriguez school - funding case that education was not a constitutional right and that the disparate spending on education for students from low - income neighborhoods was not a violation of the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The Federal Court of Australia has ruled against Valve in a landmark case last week, finding that the game developer's defence of saying «nuh - uh» really loudly was «ineffective» and «pretty dumb».

Just hours before, a U.S. judge also issued a landmark ruling in a climate change case brought by eight youth, ruling that State of Washington must reconsider the youth's proposed rule on carbon dioxide emissions.

The future judgement in Joined Cases C -204-208 / 12 Essent Belgium N.V. v. Vlaamse Reguleringsinstantie voor de Elektriciteits - en Gasmarkt could very well be one of those landmark cases in which the CJEU clarifies one of the fundamental doctrinal issues in internal market law: can Member States rely upon the rule of reason to justify distinctly applicable measCases C -204-208 / 12 Essent Belgium N.V. v. Vlaamse Reguleringsinstantie voor de Elektriciteits - en Gasmarkt could very well be one of those landmark cases in which the CJEU clarifies one of the fundamental doctrinal issues in internal market law: can Member States rely upon the rule of reason to justify distinctly applicable meascases in which the CJEU clarifies one of the fundamental doctrinal issues in internal market law: can Member States rely upon the rule of reason to justify distinctly applicable measures?

«A landmark ruling in a high - profile case,» commented a judge.

In the landmark Charman v Charman divorce ruling, the English Court of Appeal ruled last year that assets in offshore trusts created by one spouse may be included in the «matrimonial pot» of assets that an English court in a divorce case should «fairly» dividIn the landmark Charman v Charman divorce ruling, the English Court of Appeal ruled last year that assets in offshore trusts created by one spouse may be included in the «matrimonial pot» of assets that an English court in a divorce case should «fairly» dividin offshore trusts created by one spouse may be included in the «matrimonial pot» of assets that an English court in a divorce case should «fairly» dividin the «matrimonial pot» of assets that an English court in a divorce case should «fairly» dividin a divorce case should «fairly» divide.

In a landmark asbestosis case, The Court of Appeal ruled today that asbestosis sufferers could be entitled to proportional compensation from as low as 2.3 % from negligent employers, based upon the number of years worked.

When the United States Supreme Court issued its ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller in June, striking down a ban on gun possession in D.C., a team at West went to work to get this landmark case loaded to Westlaw, complete with the insight and analysis that is critical to legal researchers.

A landmark legal ruling has been secured by UK200Group member firm Virtuoso Legal in a case between retail giant Argos and Virtuoso's client, a relatively small US - based software company, Argos Systems Inc..

Several recent cases brought by celebrities have effectively created a new privacy law in the U.K. And recently, the House of Lords upheld a landmark ruling barring the friend of a well - known folk singer from publishing certain passages of a tell - all book about the celebrity.»

The author also discusses the blood quantum rule, cultural appropriation, Indigenous use of intellectual property laws, Two - Spirit identities (Indigenous transgender individuals), the landmark Delgamuukw and Tsilhqot» in cases (recognition of Aboriginal title), non-benign myths about Indigenous peoples, the six - volume Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) final report on the residential school system where at least 6,000 Indigenous children died, Canada's Stolen Generations (between 1960 and 1990, 70 - 90 % of Indigenous children in Canada were removed from their homes and placed into non-Indigenous homes), Inuit relocations, the issue of access to safe drinking water for First Nations communities, the five - volume report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Indigenous lands, education, treaties, and treaty - making.

In a landmark asbestosis case, The Court of Appeal recently ruled that asbestosis sufferers could be entitled to...

For the first time, anyone can search and read all California court opinions for free, including landmark rulings on every topic, from same - sex marriage (In re Marriage Cases, 2008) to separation of powers (Houston v. Williams, 1859).

In the landmark ruling in Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, Mario Costeja González (case nIn the landmark ruling in Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, Mario Costeja González (case nin Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, Mario Costeja González (case no.

In fact, legal claims in parallel to investigations by CVM are becoming usual in landmark cases for purposes of seeking indemnification or enforcing criminal sanctions to violations of rules and regulations applicable to the securities marketIn fact, legal claims in parallel to investigations by CVM are becoming usual in landmark cases for purposes of seeking indemnification or enforcing criminal sanctions to violations of rules and regulations applicable to the securities marketin parallel to investigations by CVM are becoming usual in landmark cases for purposes of seeking indemnification or enforcing criminal sanctions to violations of rules and regulations applicable to the securities marketin landmark cases for purposes of seeking indemnification or enforcing criminal sanctions to violations of rules and regulations applicable to the securities markets.

In a landmark asbestosis case, The Court of Appeal recently ruled that asbestosis sufferers could be entitled to proportional compensation from as low as 2.3 % from negligent employers, based upon the number of years worked.

In the landmark 1966 case Miranda v. Arizona, the Supreme Court ruled that police must inform suspects of their legal rights before arresting them.

Together, they discuss the ruling in Authors Guild v. Google, Inc., explore fair use, review the case, evaluate the Authors Guild's potential appeal and analyze how this landmark ruling will impact the book industry and the general public of readers.

The starting point is always the landmark ruling of the Supreme Court of Canada in R v Stinchcombe, [1991] 3 SCR 326 that was decided against the background of a high profile case involving a wrongful conviction for murder.

Twenty years ago, in the landmark case of Falcon v. Memorial Hospital, the Michigan Supreme Court turned history on its head and ruled that patients with a less - than -50-percent chance of survival could sue for what is called a «loss of chance.

This firm has the distinction of being the attorneys for the Plaintiff, in the precedent setting case, Juarez v. Wavecrest Management Team Ltd, which was the landmark case in which the highest court of New York State established the rules relating to legal liability of landlords in New York City for exposing tenants to the hazards of lead - based paint

This firm has the distinction of being the attorneys for the Plaintiff, in the precedent setting case, Juarez v. Wavecrest Management Team Ltd, which was the landmark case in which the highest court of New York State established the rules relating...

White & Case is the only law firm to have defended successfully at trial pharmaceutical clients against both FTC and private plaintiff reverse payment suits, and we were counsel in the landmark SCOTUS ruling on reverse payments in FTC v. Actavis.»

Our lawyers have also been involved in many cases which have been the first of their kind: They have, for example, submitted the first - ever leniency application in Finland (obtaining immunity from fines for the client); represented clients in the first - ever oral hearing of the Supreme Administrative Court in a competition case; and been lead counsel in precedent - setting, landmark (and the largest) competition damages cases — the first major cartel damages cases in which court rulings have been rendered.

Our law firm has been involved in many high profile personal injury cases, including some that resulted in landmark rulings in our favor.

In the wake of a landmark 2016 Supreme Court of Canada case, R v. Jordan, in which the top court set strict timelines to bring an accused person to trial, experts have said that one of the biggest misunderstandings from the public about the ruling is that defence lawyers will prolong a case until reaching the time limit and then request that it be stayeIn the wake of a landmark 2016 Supreme Court of Canada case, R v. Jordan, in which the top court set strict timelines to bring an accused person to trial, experts have said that one of the biggest misunderstandings from the public about the ruling is that defence lawyers will prolong a case until reaching the time limit and then request that it be stayein which the top court set strict timelines to bring an accused person to trial, experts have said that one of the biggest misunderstandings from the public about the ruling is that defence lawyers will prolong a case until reaching the time limit and then request that it be stayed.

Last week Mrs Justice Andrews DBE ruled in the High Court in a landmark Legal Professional Privilege case brought...

Legal Times: «Wednesday's decisive Supreme Court ruling against Wyeth in a landmark pharmaceutical product liability case may also close off a major front in a hard - fought battle by businesses and the Bush administration to insulate national corporations from state tort litigation.»

Members of the firm have been involved in some of the country's most high - profile and landmark cases resulting in impactful and precedential rulings.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on two landmark cases impacting same - sex couples this week and their ability to marry (I am loathe to call it same - sex marriage or gay marriage because it's just marriage, no different than anyone else's marriage; the people in it just happen to be of the same sex).

MODIFICATION PETITIONS In the landmark case of Tropea v. Tropea, the New York Court of Appeals ruled that decisions on relocation requests must be made on an individual basis, taking into consideration all facts specific to each case.

In an enormous victory for women, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to protect access to safe, legal abortion in the landmark Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt casIn an enormous victory for women, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to protect access to safe, legal abortion in the landmark Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt casin the landmark Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt case.

In the landmark Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt case on June 27, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that two abortion restrictions in Texas are unconstitutional because they would shut down most clinics in the state and cause an «undue burden» for Texas women to access safe, legal abortioIn the landmark Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt case on June 27, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that two abortion restrictions in Texas are unconstitutional because they would shut down most clinics in the state and cause an «undue burden» for Texas women to access safe, legal abortioin Texas are unconstitutional because they would shut down most clinics in the state and cause an «undue burden» for Texas women to access safe, legal abortioin the state and cause an «undue burden» for Texas women to access safe, legal abortion.

New Jersey has had a few landmark cases which establish a few rules in real estate transactions.

So ruled the Supreme Court of the State of New York in a landmark decision, known as the Nyack Case, in the 1990s.

So ruled the Supreme Court of the State of New York in a landmark decision, known as the Nyack Case,...