Search for: "United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit"
Results 341 - 360
of 2,171
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Nov 2020, 3:44 pm
Court of Appeals for the D.C. [read post]
17 Nov 2020, 11:04 am
On May 29, 2020, the Supreme Court denied an injunction in South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. [read post]
16 Nov 2020, 6:06 pm
Many of these are drawn from research for the book Ballot Battles: The History of Disputed Elections in the United States as well as work done for the American Law Institute’s Principles of Law—Election Administration project. [read post]
6 Nov 2020, 5:01 am
Stras, United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit As is usual with the Federalist Society, we try to provide balance on these panels; we invited Prof. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 9:03 pm
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit properly found that the conditions violated the Eighth Amendment, but held that “no reasonable correctional officer could have concluded that, under the extreme circumstances of this case, it was constitutionally permissible to house Taylor in such deplorably unsanitary conditions for such an extended period of time. [read post]
3 Nov 2020, 2:31 am
The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit properly held that such conditions of confinement violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. [read post]
28 Oct 2020, 6:55 pm
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, handed down a ruling in the case, Leymis Velasquez, et al v. [read post]
24 Oct 2020, 6:10 pm
Simon, a Republican appeal proceeded at the Eighth Circuit with the court considering an emergency motion to block a district judge’s decision. [read post]
20 Oct 2020, 2:06 pm
This post summarizes published criminal and related decisions from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decided in September, 2020. [read post]
19 Oct 2020, 8:43 am
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recognized that a use-of-force policy signed by the director of the Memphis Police Department was an official policy under Monell. [read post]
18 Oct 2020, 11:31 am
United States, 430 U.S. 188, 193 (1977). . . . [read post]
14 Oct 2020, 2:32 pm
Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit violated 28 U.S.C. [read post]
13 Oct 2020, 7:57 pm
Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit finding that Idaho prison officials violated the Eighth Amendment by refusing to provide a transgender inmate with gender reassignment surgery. [read post]
13 Oct 2020, 10:51 am
The specific question before the Court is whether the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals erred in holding that Arkansas’s statute regulating PBMs’ drug-reimbursement rates, which is similar to laws enacted by a substantial majority of States, is preempted by ERISA, in contravention of this Court’s precedent that ERISA does not preempt rate regulation. [read post]
7 Oct 2020, 3:23 pm
Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. [read post]
7 Oct 2020, 7:37 am
The case is on appeal from the Eighth Circuit, which held the Act was preempted by ERISA. [read post]
2 Oct 2020, 1:44 pm
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Kicks Climate Change Case Back to State Court”, a circuit split has developed on the appropriate scope of appellate review: the Second, Third, Eighth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits follow the Fourth Circuit’s decision and limit their review to federal officer removal grounds, while the Seventh, Fifth, and Sixth Circuits have held that any ground for… [read post]
2 Oct 2020, 1:44 pm
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Kicks Climate Change Case Back to State Court”, a circuit split has developed on the appropriate scope of appellate review: the Second, Third, Eighth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits follow the Fourth Circuit’s decision and limit their review to federal officer removal grounds, while the Seventh, Fifth, and Sixth Circuits have held that any ground for… [read post]
2 Oct 2020, 11:34 am
United States v. [read post]
11 Sep 2020, 4:03 am
In 2007, the trial court ruling was reviewed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, who overturned it on the basis that the ACLU and other plaintiffs did not have legal standing to sue because they could not say with certainty that they were surveilled as a result of the program. [read post]
