Sentences with phrase «written opinion of the court»

The written opinion of the court indicates that the plaintiff was headed from the hospital pharmacy to her relative's room when she slipped on a puddle of water that had accumulated outside a bathroom door.

Senior Circuit Judge Terence T. Evans wrote the opinion of the court.

Not exact matches

Particularly in light of the Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, which struck down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban and found Americans had an individual right to a firearm — a 5 - 4 decision in which Stevens wrote the primary dissenting opinion — Stevens called the Second Amendment a barrier to «constructive gun control legislation.»

«Because there is no genuine dispute of material fact that Sulyma had actual knowledge of the facts comprising claims I and III, as well as knowledge of the disclosures he alleges were unlawfully inadequate in claims II and IV, the Court grants defendants» motion for summary judgment on those claims, finding them time - barred,» Cousins wrote in his opinion.

For example, a couple of years ago he wrote an opinion for the Court validating Colorado's so - called «bubble law,» which requires protestors to stay eight feet from any person approaching a health care facility.

That was clearly the hope of the Supreme Court majority that signed onto the opinion written by Associate Justice Harry Blackmun.

Many who hated Scalia's rulings could not help but be entertained by his razor - sharp writing, which he used especially in his dissenting opinions to carve up the majority's reasoning (my favorite is Planned Parenthood v. Casey, where among other things he referred to the majority's «Nietzschean vision of us unelected, life - tenured judges — leading a Volk who will be «tested by following»» the Court's rulings obediently).

As a judge in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, Gorsuch wrote a concurring opinion supporting Hobby Lobby's contraception mandate exemption — a ruling ultimately upheld by the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes emphasized the danger of invoking divine morality when he wrote, in a 1917 opinion, «The law is not a brooding omnipresence in the sky.»

The stated aim of this volume is to bring to a wider audience «some of the most noteworthy, colorful, and entertaining opinions ever written by a United States Supreme Court Justice.»

But in keeping with Eugene V. Rostow's characterization of the contemporary Supreme Court as a «vital national seminar,» it is worth noting that the original charge to the Court was only that it render an aye or a nay.44 It quickly began handing down written opinions also, however, and under Marshall began the practice of trying for a single majority opinion, which gave «judicial pronouncements a forceful unity they had formerly lacked.

In 1985, President Ronald Reagan appointed him to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, where he served for thirty years, writing more than one thousand opinions and dissents.

From the buzz around Kate Bolick's book Spinster: Making a Life of One's Own to the unfortunate language Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy used in writing the opinion legalizing same - sex marriage, of the unmarried being «condemned to live in loneliness,» the state of singles — and let's be honest, mostly single women — has been on a lot of people's minds.

Justice Anthony Kennedy continued a nearly two - decade history of siding with gay and lesbian Americans, writing the court's 5 — 4 opinion striking down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act.

A third judge, Pataki appointee Albert Rosenblatt, wrote a concurring opinion that said the court would be shirking its duty if it «punted» and left to future cases the determination of the bright line's location — even though that's exactly what it did.

If anyone is not satisfied, they should write to the courts as an independent arbiter for an interpretation of «maintaining status quo»: rather than spread misinformation in the court of public opinion,»

«The court notes that there was opinion testimony offered to the effect that (1) but for being asked by Henry Wojtasek, Synor probably would not have hired Meghan Ortt, (2) that she had a «no - show job,» and (3) that Synor was a conduit for funds to be paid to her,» the judge wrote of the grand jury testimony he inspected.

In a 54 - page opinion released Thursday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit wrote that while prosecutors had presented enough evidence to justify Silver's convictions, jurors had been wrongly instructed on the action Silver would have to take to make his conduct count as criminal public corruption.

Quoting from the dissenting opinion of the appeals court judge, he writes: «While it may be true that by following the Court of Appeals» conclusion as to the ambiguity of «research,» this Court has become a grudging partner in a bout of «linguistic jujitsu,»... such is life for an antepenultimate court.&rcourt judge, he writes: «While it may be true that by following the Court of Appeals» conclusion as to the ambiguity of «research,» this Court has become a grudging partner in a bout of «linguistic jujitsu,»... such is life for an antepenultimate court.&rCourt of Appeals» conclusion as to the ambiguity of «research,» this Court has become a grudging partner in a bout of «linguistic jujitsu,»... such is life for an antepenultimate court.&rCourt has become a grudging partner in a bout of «linguistic jujitsu,»... such is life for an antepenultimate court.&rcourt.»

The challengers — an alliance of energy and fossil fuel companies and coal - producing states — wanted the court «to do something that they candidly acknowledge we have never done before: review the legality of a proposed rule,» wrote Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in an opinion unanimously backed by a three - judge pcourt «to do something that they candidly acknowledge we have never done before: review the legality of a proposed rule,» wrote Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in an opinion unanimously backed by a three - judge pCourt of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in an opinion unanimously backed by a three - judge panel.

Although the court ruled that human genetic material is not patentable — there is «no doubt that naturally occurring DNA and RNA as they exist inside the cells of the human body can not be the subject of a valid patent,» Nicholas wrote in his opinion — it concluded that the process of isolating the BRCA1 gene from the human body required human intervention.

If so, such an opinion would be especially compelling coming from the pen of Justice Thomas, the lone black member of the Court, who has written for the majority in a number of important cases involving religion and education.

Some of the quotes below, all of which were taken directly from Justice Kennedy's written opinion, reflect the Supreme Court's response to the lower court ruling, not to the original complCourt's response to the lower court ruling, not to the original complcourt ruling, not to the original complaint.

Then I'd dip into how inaccurate eye witness accounts are — all as a set up for court room writing prompt (heavy on the fact vs. opinion side of things)

In an opinion written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the court reversed an earlier ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, in St. Louis, that had upheld Missouri's denial of the gcourt reversed an earlier ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, in St. Louis, that had upheld Missouri's denial of the gCourt of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, in St. Louis, that had upheld Missouri's denial of the grant.

«It is crucial for a democratic society to provide all of its schoolchildren with fair access to an unsegregated education,» Ellen A. Peters, then chief justice of the state's High Court, wrote in the majority opinion in July 1996.

The court's majority opinion was written by Oliver Wendell Holmes: «It is better for all the world,» Holmes wrote, «if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind.

«The immediate cause of these lower returns is undisputed: Fidelity allocated MIP investments away from higher - return, but higher - risk sectors (e.g., corporate bonds, mortgage pass - throughs, and asset - backed securities) and toward treasuries and other cash - like or shorter duration instruments,» the appellate court wrote in its opinion.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg in the court opinion wrote, «Maryland's regulatory program to encourage development of new in - state energy generation is preempted by the Federal Power Act, which vests in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission exclusive jurisdiction over interstate wholesale electricity rates.»

Petitioners... want us to do something that they candidly acknowledge we have never done before: review the legality of a proposed rule,» Judge Brett Kavanaugh wrote in the court's opinion.

It should be noted that under Spanish law, a member of the Court may write both the majority decision and a personal opinion.

Posts cover cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, and blogger Lyle Denniston also writes a «constitution check» series of posts in which he investigates assertions made about the constitution in the media and appellate opinions.

Moreover, it seems odd that Mr Covaci would be entitled to help of an interpreter when he physically goes to the registry of the national court to orally object to the penalty order or when he sits down with a lawyer to file a written objection, but not when he wants to file a written objection by himself from his home (see also Opinion AG Bot, § 69).

As Judge Posner wrote in an opinion this week, the word «choate» is a «barbarism» that, while «fairly well ensconced in the legal vocabulary,» shall not be used in his court as it is «not only a sign of ignorance but also a source of confusion.»

I do think that some of them nicely illustrate a larger problem — that (in some terms of the Court or with some clerks) Blackmun was shockingly uninvolved with the basic task of writing opinions, serving more as a substantive cite - checker for his clerks» writing the opinions.

Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the court and concluded his majority opinion by declaring: «We hold that imposing an increased sentence under the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act violates the Constitution's guarantee of due process.»

The jury of popular opinion is divided on the writing style of the newest justice on the Supreme Court.

I stand in front of a judge and give a professional opinion and write legal reports to court, and do exactly the same work as an attorney - GAL does.

We are of course appealing, but I wanted to point out how thoughtful and well - written the hon. court's opinion was.

But the situation is no different with the courts - judges with a unique judicial voice, like Judge Richard Posner, write their own opinions precisely because they desire a consistent tone across all of their opinions.

The New Mexico Court of Appeals recently wrote an opinion regarding New Mexico uninsured motorist coverage waivers.

One of the creditor's lawyers, Boston's Nicole Corvini Daly, who worked on the case with her colleague William A. Haddad, said in a written statement that she was pleased with «the clarity» provided by the opinion and the confirmation that the franchisor could pursue injunctive relief in the state court proceeding.

See Brugger, supra n. 141, at 647 (stating that while Tucker's moot court was «no innovation in legal training,» Tucker enjoyed using it); Butler, supra n. 143, at 29 (stating that «with the higher view of preparing students for speaking and writing on legal subjects, it will be useful to exercise their minds by forensic debates in moot courts, and by requiring from them written opinions on questions of law, and readings and dissertations on statutes and other themes, as circumstances permit»); Laub, supra n. 144, at 14 (quoting Reed's letter to the Dickinson College Trustees on a course of study); Barrow, supra n. 148, at 289.

While most of the curriculum at Harvard during this time consisted of lecture and student recitation, skills development was also provided in the form of weekly moot courts, during which students argued questions of law before professors and submitted occasional written disputations on legal subjects.121 Although Stearns had previously used moot courts in his teaching at Harvard, Story and Ashmun refined them.122 Cases were handed out the week before argument, and two counsel were assigned to each side.123 The cases would then be argued the next Friday, with the other students taking notes of the argument; the professor in charge that week would issue a written opinion.124

Opinion Writing is a classic work by the Honorable Ruggero J. Aldisert, Senior United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and one of the most respected scholars on judicial opinion wOpinion Writing is a classic work by the Honorable Ruggero J. Aldisert, Senior United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and one of the most respected scholars on judicial opinion wWriting is a classic work by the Honorable Ruggero J. Aldisert, Senior United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and one of the most respected scholars on judicial opinion wopinion writingwriting.

Besides teaching the art of opinion writing, this training would include teaching students how to write bench memos and the other documents necessary in trial court clerkships.

Earlier this month, a state appellate court issued a written opinion in a personal injury case that illustrates the importance of following all procedural and court rules in South Florida medical malpractice cases.

«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.

He claims that because one of the major functions of appellate courts is law development; opinions are properly written more like the rules found in statutes so that the public can better follow the law and lawyers can better predict how a court will rule.

At trial, the court found that the real purpose of the indemnity was to discourage the wife from reporting the matters in issue to the authorities, and wrote that «it would be in my opinion, contrary to public policy for the courts to lend assistance to the nondisclosure of statutory offences.»