Search for: "4th District Court of Appeal" Results 1 - 20 of 6,820
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 May 2024, 8:17 am by Phil Dixon
After being convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm and some of the drug offenses, the defendant appealed, arguing in part that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress. [read post]
17 May 2024, 2:18 pm by Nikki Siesel
Thereafter, the European Consortium appealed to the Fourth Circuit of the Court of Appeals. [read post]
16 May 2024, 4:10 am by Howard Friedman
McKnight, (4th Cir., Maay 15, 2024), the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in a 2-1 decision affirmed a Maryland federal district court's denial of a preliminary injunction in a challenge to a school board's refusal to allow parents to opt their children out of exposure to a group of LGBTQ inclusive books. [read post]
15 May 2024, 7:41 am by Eric Goldman
All of the Courts of Appeals that have addressed the issue have held that the discovery rule applies to the Copyright Act’s three-year statute of limitations. [read post]
13 May 2024, 7:36 am by Eric Goldman
With that in mind, this district court carefully considered each of the claims asserted. [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
As the Court of Appeals has explained, "[c]ourts are bound by an arbitrator's factual findings, interpretation of the contract and judgment concerning remedies. [read post]
10 May 2024, 6:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
As the Court of Appeals has explained, "[c]ourts are bound by an arbitrator's factual findings, interpretation of the contract and judgment concerning remedies. [read post]
9 May 2024, 3:59 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
In sum, we conclude that the district court did not err in denying Appellants' motion for a preliminary injunction. [read post]
8 May 2024, 1:58 pm by Eugene Volokh
In 2022, the First Circuit joined its sister circuits in ruling that a district court order denying a motion to proceed by pseudonym is immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine. [read post]
6 May 2024, 8:44 am by Jeff Welty
A district court, and the Ninth Circuit on appeal, ruled that the challenged ordinances violated the Eighth Amendment’s Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause as to the plaintiffs. [read post]
3 May 2024, 12:15 am
  Both the District Court and the Court of Appeal, however, agreed that the Reves test was the applicable test. [read post]
1 May 2024, 1:18 pm by Melissa Tremblay
District Court for the Central District of California found the relators’ AKS scienter allegations sufficient when the relators cited “reports published by [the U.S. [read post]