Sentences with phrase «precedent by the federal court»

Should state courts follow the precedent by the federal court?

Not exact matches

While the O'Bannon precedent is influential in most of the country, it is fully binding in federal districts governed by the Ninth Circuit (which includes federal district courts in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington).

The term «water law» in the Colorado River basin has come to refer to a monstrous volume of federal statutes and agreements, court precedents and state laws and regulations that can differ from place to place and have changed incrementally over the years but are structured by the interstate agreements to divide the river.

After a precedent was set by the Supreme Court, federal law doesn't allow student loan debt to be discharged in bankruptcy, although other forms of outstanding debt such as credit cards have the potential for discharge in bankruptcy.

The game makers are wrong to argue that the Federal Circuit should rehear the case because the appellate court panel allegedly created a «safe harbor» for technological ideas, as the court simply followed precedent for abstract claims as set by Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that abstract ideas implemented using a computer are not eligible for a patent, asserted McRO Inc. in its bcourt panel allegedly created a «safe harbor» for technological ideas, as the court simply followed precedent for abstract claims as set by Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that abstract ideas implemented using a computer are not eligible for a patent, asserted McRO Inc. in its bcourt simply followed precedent for abstract claims as set by Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, a 2014 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that abstract ideas implemented using a computer are not eligible for a patent, asserted McRO Inc. in its bCourt decision that held that abstract ideas implemented using a computer are not eligible for a patent, asserted McRO Inc. in its brief.

Three times in two years, the Supreme Court has overturned precedent established by the Federal Circuit — the very court created to help bring uniformity to patentCourt has overturned precedent established by the Federal Circuit — the very court created to help bring uniformity to patentcourt created to help bring uniformity to patent law.

Some patent lawyers say all this Supreme wrist - slapping has been felt by the Federal Circuit, as most notably evidenced by its August decision In re Seagate Technology, in which it overruled a quarter century of its own decisions and brought itself more in line with Supreme Court precedent.

Lists of all federal, state, and local laws struck down by the Supreme Court, and all cases where the court overturned its prior preceCourt, and all cases where the court overturned its prior prececourt overturned its prior precedent.

There is a precedent here: when the Quebec government asked the Supreme Court of Canada for a reference on whether or not the federal law on assisted reproduction overstepped federal jurisdiction by in effect criminalizing practices that should be considered as falling within the sphere of provincial health policy, an admittedly bitterly divided Court agreed with Quebec's Attorney General, at least with respect to certain key articles of that law.

Appeals are more - often - than - not declined by the Supreme Court so adjudication may stop at the federal United States Courts of Appeals (circuit courts) or District Courts and those are a good place to look for precedentCourts of Appeals (circuit courts) or District Courts and those are a good place to look for precedentcourts) or District Courts and those are a good place to look for precedentCourts and those are a good place to look for precedent, too.

[18] Paragraph (d)(2) recognizes that a lawyer may provide legal services in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is not licensed when authorized to do so by federal or other law, which includes statute, court rule, executive regulation or judicial precedent.

If state courts are the authoritative expositors of state law, and they choose, as a matter of state procedural law, to be bound by a federal precedent that isn't otherwise binding as a matter of federal law, I don't see how that raises any kind of federal constitutional concern under the Supremacy Clause.

At least as a matter of current doctrine, then, there's at least some support for the notion that state courts can, indeed, choose whether and under what circumstances they will be bound by federal precedents that wouldn't otherwise be binding.

Following up on his appearance on the Oral Argument podcast, Michael Dorf has a fascinating post up this morning at «Dorf on Law» in which he tackles the intriguing question of whether state courts may choose to «gratuitously» be bound by federal precedents that don't actually bind them under the Supremacy Clause.

American legal commentators expect that the decision in State v. Earls will be followed by other state courts, particularly in light of other strong state and federal precedent weighing towards heavier protection of digital privacy rights.

While state courts are bound by US Supreme Court precedent (not just any federal court, only the Supreme Court) on matters of federal law, that's irrelevant Court precedent (not just any federal court, only the Supreme Court) on matters of federal law, that's irrelevant court, only the Supreme Court) on matters of federal law, that's irrelevant Court) on matters of federal law, that's irrelevant here.