Search for: "Jones v. District Court" Results 181 - 200 of 3,113
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Mar 2012, 6:43 pm by Orin Kerr
Held by District Judge Gwin: The mosaic theory does not apply, because the majority in Jones did not adopt the mosaic theory. [read post]
29 Aug 2011, 2:43 pm
However, recently the United States Supreme Court in the case of Atlantic Sounding Co., v. [read post]
4 Mar 2021, 12:42 pm
”  The district court held they were.The Ninth Circuit reverses.I won't claim to be the world's greatest expert on SLUSA. [read post]
9 Feb 2017, 7:06 am by Steven Boutwell
Townsend, 557 U.S. 404 (2009), we are likely to see a lack of harmony among the district court judges considering this issue. [read post]
29 Sep 2011, 1:38 pm
District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging that Gibraltar was running an alleged Ponzi scheme with others, including the Rahfco Funds LP. [read post]
22 Dec 2020, 1:52 pm by Gabriel Silva
Plaintiff appealed the district court’s decision contending that, as a matter of law, a Jones Act seaman may not be held contributorily negligent when carrying out an order. [read post]
29 Jun 2011, 6:02 am by A. Benjamin Spencer
Fandino, No. 10-250, to the California 2nd District Court of Appeals, for reconsideration in light of Nicastro. [read post]
22 Oct 2008, 8:26 pm
The Fifth Circuit remanded the case to the District Court to determine whether plaintiff had been contributorily negligent in “exposing himself to heavy labor with a weakened back. [read post]
11 May 2022, 12:30 pm
Plaintiffs move for a preliminary injunction, which the district court denies, and plaintiffs appeal. [read post]
11 Dec 2007, 8:45 am
  In Jones, the district court relied on the defendant's misconduct in jail while awaiting sentencing to add nearly 1.5 years of additional imprisonment to his suggested guideline sentence. [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 7:35 pm by Aurora Barnes
Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, sitting en banc, applied an impermissibly broad reading of Johnson v. [read post]