Search for: "IN RE ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT TO RULE 6-1(a) OF THE RULES OF THE SUPREME COURT AND COURT OF APPEALS"
Results 21 - 40
of 464
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Feb 2024, 3:00 am
Federal Appeals Court Rejects Trump’s Claim of Absolute Immunity MSN – Alan Feuer and Charlie Savage (New York Times) | Published: 2/6/2024 A federal appeals court rejected former President Donald Trump’s claim that he was immune to charges of plotting to subvert the results of the 2020 election, ruling he must go to trial on a criminal indictment accusing him of seeking to overturn his loss to President Biden. [read post]
8 Feb 2024, 4:09 pm
The decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal). [read post]
4 Feb 2024, 6:29 pm
”[3] Ultimately, the Colorado Supreme Court decided that “for purposes of deciding this case, we need not adopt a single, all-encompassing definition of the word ‘insurrection. [read post]
4 Feb 2024, 1:01 pm
On appeal to the Supreme Court, the Colorado voters in Trump v. [read post]
3 Jan 2024, 7:15 am
The Supreme Court found no error in the indictment and reversed the Court of Appeals. [read post]
8 Dec 2023, 7:54 am
On December 6, the Colorado Supreme Court heard oral argument in Griswold v. [read post]
8 Dec 2023, 3:00 am
Supreme Court. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 12:41 pm
On December 6, the Colorado Supreme Court heard oral argument in Griswold v. [read post]
13 Nov 2023, 4:07 am
I recently had the privilege of speaking to an audience of judges of the New York Supreme Court Commercial Division at Fordham Law School’s Eileen Bransten Institute on Complex Commercial Litigation. [read post]
27 Oct 2023, 4:00 am
A panel of the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals ruled there are numerous ways for the government to prove January 6 defendants acted “corruptly” when seeking to obstruct Congress’ proceedings. [read post]
11 Oct 2023, 3:30 pm
The Sixth Edition also includes a full discussion and analysis of all intervening Supreme Court and important lower court opinions, and changes in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, all up through May 20, 2023. [read post]
4 Oct 2023, 7:54 am
Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 126 (1976), the Supreme Court held that Officers of the United States are those who "exercis[e] significant authority pursuant to the laws of the United States. [read post]
14 Sep 2023, 6:00 am
Part 1 of this piece can be found here. [read post]
6 Aug 2023, 5:40 am
The record supported Supreme Court’s determination that the wife was not entitled to maintenance. [read post]
3 Aug 2023, 4:49 am
The EU Commission published a long awaited Proposal for a Directive on Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence (CSDDD), COM(2022) 71 final, on 23 February 2022; the EU Council adopted its negotiation position on 1 December 2022; and now, the EU Parliament has suggested amendments to this Draft Directive on 1 June 2023. [read post]
27 Jul 2023, 6:28 pm
At the same time, the re creation of the dynamics of either, especially for the best of intentions produces the impulse toward the sort of national infantilization that might have been understood as a cornerstone for the justification of 20th century empire. [read post]
6 Jul 2023, 7:53 am
The underlying appeal that prompted the Florida Supreme Court’s rule change was University of Florida Board of Trustees, et al. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2023, 9:01 pm
EPA.[46] As the Supreme Court observed, “[e]xtraordinary grants of regulatory authority are rarely accomplished through ‘modest words,’ ‘vague terms,’ or ‘subtle device[s]’” and that Congress does not “typically use oblique or elliptical language to empower an agency to make a ‘radical or fundamental change’ to a statutory sche [read post]
22 Jun 2023, 9:05 pm
Provides for Director review of PTAB decisions by adopting the structure the Supreme Court suggested in Arthrex to fix the appointments of the Administrative Patent Judges under the Appointments clause and requires the Director to issue a separate written opinion when rehearing a PTAB decision. [read post]
22 Jun 2023, 9:05 pm
Provides for Director review of PTAB decisions by adopting the structure the Supreme Court suggested in Arthrex to fix the appointments of the Administrative Patent Judges under the Appointments clause and requires the Director to issue a separate written opinion when rehearing a PTAB decision. [read post]
