Sentences with phrase «majority of case law»

Hein said the majority of the case law actually falls in line with CEQ's new directive.

The vast majority of case law in this area has held that such consumer fraud actions are preempted by the FDA and that there is no private right for an individual to bring a case in this area.

Not exact matches

And in some instances, it has been Scalia and Thomas who have done so more than those who may think of themselves less as originalists (in one recent case in particular Scalia and Thomas dissented from the majority which held that convicted child molesters could be indefinitely imprisoned despite having fully served their sentences based on subtle shifts of language and the over-application of prior case law — no one wants a child molester free and about, but such results focused outcomes are always dangerous).

Unmoved by the prospect of the end of democracy, and skeptical about the existence of a moral law, they might say that the system still «works» to the satisfaction of the great majority and, niceties about moral legitimacy aside, we will muddle through so long as that continues to be the case.

Our role is to look after the interests of children when cases are referred to us by the courts and we acknowledge that in the vast majority of private law cases this will be best served by preserving children's relationships with both parents.

Senate Majority Leader John Flanagan in a statement Tuesday said he would be willing to discuss «additional changes» to the state's ethics and transparency laws after the guilty verdict in the corruption case of Joe Percoco, a former close aide to Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

Senate Majority Leader John Flanagan, who made the committee appointments, insisted «the law is on our side and so is case law,» adding: «I believe that all the members, Democrat and Republican, Assembly or Senate are worthy of the compensation that they receive... All of this is transparent, all of this is disclosed.»

Assembly Democrats have the vast majority of the votes in a special session and there is case law precedent for them appointing replacements in statewide office vacancies.

Senate Deputy Majority Leader Tom Libous (R - Binghamton) is charged with lying to FBI agents in a case in which he's accused of using his political influence to land a job for his son in a law firm.

Complicating matters further for Senate Republicans is the condition of their deputy majority leader, Tom Libous: The Binghamton Republican, already undergoing treatments for terminal cancer, faces a charge of lying to the FBI in case revolving around his son's employment at a politically connected law firm.

On Wednesday, Republican Tom Libous, the deputy majority leader, was ousted from his Senate seat after he was convicted of lying to the FBI in a case stemming from his son receiving a job at a politically connected law firm.

The others are the case involving alleged election law violations by former Newfane Republican Sen. George Maziarz in March; the re-trials in April and May of former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and former Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos; the Buffalo Billion corruption case trial set for June; and, on Long Island, the corruption trial of former Nassau County Executive Ed Mangano in March.

«It's just surreal,» said Jaron Benjamin a week after the conviction of former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and on the day of closing arguments in the federal corruption case against former Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos, knowing that those cases may have been bolstered by work he did years ago in the fight to strengthen the state's rent laws.

Former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld, whose law firm is defending former Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno in federal court, said in a Talk 1300 - AM radio interview this morning that the case should be tossed out, saying that retrying him smacked of double jeopardy.

That law states that in such instances, a majority of the party's statewide candidates from the previous election (in this case there are four) must back one of the rule sets.

The California Senate Legislative Counsel issued last week a sweeping opinion, concluding a controversy as to whether a school district — Los Angeles Unified, in this case — can proclaim itself exempt from California's historic Parent Trigger law, which enables parents of kids in chronically underperforming schools to transform it if a majority of parents -LSB-...]

A majority of anti-cruelty laws are limited to cases involving aggravated cruelty, torture, or cruelty to companion animals.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of case comments seem to be written by lawyers, for lawyers: heavy on the facts and applicable law, weighed down with lengthy excerpts from the judge's ruling, and light on analysis and implications for readers.

Whilst there are undoubtedly going to be some businesses that deliberately play the system to save money, the majority of cases I see result from a total ignorance as to how the law in this area works.

«The executive is bound to comply with the rule of law that prevails in this jurisdiction,» Justice John Paul Stevens, writing for the 5 - to - 3 majority, said at the end of a 73 - page opinion that in sober tones shredded each of the administration's arguments, including the assertion that Congress had stripped the court of jurisdiction to decide the case.

James's practice is international in nature and the majority of his cases involve issues of conflicts of law or jurisdiction.

The majority of his practice centers on criminal defense, however, he also takes some family law cases.

FWIW, this is much more generous than under U.S. law in which no compensation of any kind is payable to an acquitted criminal defendant in the vast majority of cases either by the government or by an accuser.

As Thomas Smith observed in Web of Law, the U.S. citation network is highly skewed, with much of the legal authority concentrated in very few cases and the majority of it «dead.»

In other words, they are selected according to their relevance in areas of law applicable across Canada; accordingly, a majority of our translations are of criminal law, bankruptcy law, and constitutional law cases.

This turns out to be much easier than it seems naively, because the vast majority of statutory law and regulations are relevant to only a very modest number of people and is subject to only very slight case law interpretation.

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.

What interests me is that the U.S. court decision is unlikely to have any real impact on the state of the law (though it may cause lawyers headaches in having to screen the large mass of cases), given the fact that the vast majority of cases are never cited more than a very few times — DNA lines, as it were, that die out as «unfit.»

The vast majority of personal injury and civil cases are issued with a jury notice, and consequently rarely have a reported decision with a trial amount unless it is appealed on quantum, costs, or an unrelated point of law.

At paragraph 60, the majority outlines that «The 1972 Act... authorises a dynamic process by which, without further primary legislation (and, in some cases, even without any domestic legislation), EU law not only becomes a source of UK law, but actually takes precedence over all domestic sources of UK law, including statutes» (emphasis added).

Many people assume that access to justice is only specific to a few fields like family law, where the majority of litigants operate pro se, leading to the backlog of cases.

But, Nebraska bankruptcy laws outline exemptions that, in the majority of cases, prevent any property sale.

A review of case law makes clear the majority of such allegations are dismissed at trial due to insufficient proof.

Meanwhile, these four types of damage caused by the problem are getting worse: (1) to the population in that there are many thousands of people whose lives have been damaged for lack of legal services; (2) to the courts in that they are being clogged, as judges have warned, by high percentages of self - represented litigants, because their cases move much more slowly than those that have lawyers; (3) to the legal profession in that it is shrinking and is predicted to have a very negative future of contracting and of law firms failing; and, (4) to legal aid organizations because it is politically very unwise for governments to fund them better with taxpayers» money, to enable them to provide free legal services to more poor people, while the majority of the taxpayers can not obtain legal services for themselves at reasonable cost.

For all that the wartime case is remembered for the stirring rhetoric of Lord Atkin («amid the clash of arms, the laws are not silent»), the majority of his colleagues thought that there should be no judicial check on the exercise of the home secretary's power to consign someone to internment.

The majority of non-married custody and visitation cases follow the same laws and patterns of married custody cases.

The majority of family law cases are settled by reaching agreements, but we are fully prepared to take cases to trial when necessary.

The majority of lawsuits in Connecticut are settled before they get to trial, but what happens in your case depends on the facts, the law and the parties involved.

The Supreme Court ruled in the Head Money Cases that «treaties» (ratified by 2/3 of the Senate as specified in Article II) have the same legal effect in US law as regular legislation passed by Congress (by a simple majority of both houses), which means that Congress can modify or repeal (insofar as US law is concerned) any «treaty» that is ratified by the Senate, by passing a later law that contradicts it, just like it can with regular legislation.

In Dangerfield's experience, the first sign of trouble for a lawyer, and the subject of the majority of complaints to the Manitoba law society, is his or her failure to respond to the client, either by ignoring phone calls or not providing updates on the status of their cases.

The public trust doctrine has not been widely discussed in Canadian case law with the only significant mention being by the Supreme Court of Canada in British Columbia v. Canadian Forest Products Ltd., 2004 SCC 38 at para. 74 where Binnie J. acknowledged that «The notion that there are public rights in the environment that reside in the Crown has deep roots in the common law» (however, the majority decision ultimately took a conservative approach to not allow the Crown to succeed in a general claim for damages for «environmental loss» [caused by a negligently undetected controlled burn of slashing and other waste by a logging company] in the absence of a statutory scheme permitting such a claim).

While the Baylor University decision does not answer the question of when and in what circumstances the Board will recognize an employer's right to lawfully require confidentiality in settlement agreements and other agreements that where they would have been found to interfere with employees» Section 7 rights, the tea leaves more than suggest a change in Board law as soon as the Board returns to five members and an appropriate case is before the new majority.

While it may come as a surprise to people who are unfamiliar with personal injury law, the vast majority of cases that arise from car crashes and other preventable accidents are resolved long before either party sees the inside of a courtroom.

The rationale underpinning the majority opinion is that, in cases of mandatory minimum sentences, it is the nature of the law and not the status of the offender that is in issue.

The vast majority of cases, including family law matters, are resolved without a trial, through agreement of the spouses, negotiations by their attorneys, or mediation.

In his post, George details our analysis of the most common reasons for law firm failure and concludes that in the majority of cases failure could have been prevented.

Legislatures are not constitutionally required, in all cases and for all industries, to enact laws that set up a uniform model of labour relations imposing a statutory duty to bargain in good faith, statutory recognition of the principles of exclusive majority representation and a statutory mechanism for resolving bargaining impasses and disputes regarding the interpretation or administration of collective agreements.

The suggestion that the desire to avoid civil law majorities expressed the ad hoc rules should be carried over into an interpretation that it is only current membership at the time of appointment (or in the case of lawyers, even uninterrupted ten years membership) that ensures that the representatives will be seen as legitimate is laughable.

The majority of cases that land on the desks of law society investigators are completed within less than 10 months.

The majority found the standard to be applied was palpable and overriding error because the case did not involve a standard form contract and there was no «extricable error of law» made by the Chambers Judge (see para. 7).