Search for: "U.S. v. Ate"
Results 1 - 20
of 564
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
16 Mar 2017, 7:31 am
Doe v Nestle was filed in 2005. [read post]
18 Apr 2013, 11:56 am
The U.S. [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 8:44 am
That decision, as we noted at the time, held that Kiobel barred ATS suits based on conduct occurring abroad, even those against U.S. defendants. [read post]
23 Dec 2013, 4:03 pm
On December 19, a panel of the Ninth Circuit issued a brief order in the long-running Doe v. [read post]
16 Dec 2015, 12:08 pm
In the seminal ATS case Sosa v. [read post]
13 Apr 2009, 3:04 am
Our colleague Julian Ku over at Opinio Juris seems concerned that in refusing to dismiss apartheid-related ATS claims (from Ntsebeza v. [read post]
7 Mar 2012, 10:11 am
Royal Dutch Petroleum involves the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), which permits non-U.S. citizens to bring a lawsuit in federal court in order to seek relief for certain violations of international law. [read post]
24 Jul 2012, 12:43 pm
The following response in our symposium on Kiobel v. [read post]
6 Apr 2012, 8:45 am
Eugene Kontorovich, guest-blogging) In discussions of Kiobel v. [read post]
1 May 2018, 12:51 pm
Arab Bank, PLC, 584 U.S. ___, 2018 WL 1914663 (U.S. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 10:12 am
The following response in our symposium on Kiobel v. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 1:00 pm
The U.S. [read post]
17 Jul 2012, 8:37 am
The following contribution to our symposium on Kiobel v. [read post]
28 Sep 2014, 11:17 am
Baloco v. [read post]
8 May 2018, 6:32 pm
Arab Bank, the U.S. [read post]
26 Sep 2014, 2:06 pm
First, the court reaffirmed a prior holding that ATS jurisdiction was appropriate even under the Supreme Court’s decision in Kiobel v. [read post]
3 Oct 2012, 5:20 pm
The case involves the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), which permits non-U.S. citizens to bring a lawsuit in federal court in order to seek relief for certain violations of international law. [read post]
3 Feb 2017, 7:30 am
Finally, the court decided that it had jurisdiction under the ATS, even after the Supreme Court significantly narrowed the statute’s reach in Kiobel v. [read post]
