Search for: "American Express Co., Appellant, v. the United States, Appellee" Results 1 - 20 of 21
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 Feb 2023, 5:19 pm
Stephens, 574 U.S. 271, 276 (2015) (quoting United States v. [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 5:26 pm
  That relationship itself evidences the great tension between the American embrace of notions of popular sovereignty and its expression only through law (starting with the constitution as its highest expression) on the one hand, and the American embrace of the notion that government is formed out of higher law which itself may not be constrained by government and its law (even its constitution). [read post]
11 May 2019, 11:47 am by MOTP
 See Nixon, 690 S.W.2d at 548-49.The disposition of the affidavit issue mirrors an earlier case involving American Express, in which the defendant, a former Harris County district court judge, had also filed a controverting affidavit, in which he denied having received the cardmember agreement on which the bank moved for summary judgment, and had specially denied that he had consented to the interest rates charged by American Express. [read post]
17 Mar 2020, 7:00 am by Andrew Hamm
United States 19-1026Issues: (1) Whether the U.S. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 9:33 am by DMLP Staff
Yelp noted that numerous appellate courts, most notably in Dendrite v. [read post]
23 May 2022, 6:42 am by Eric Goldman
They could not remove speech glorifying terrorist attacks against the United States—unless they also remove speech decrying, memorializing, or educating about terrorist attacks against the United States. [read post]
25 Dec 2018, 3:00 am by Wolfgang Demino
The Center now has some 80 lawyers and non-lawyer advisors distributed across 27 states, but expects eventually to have representatives in all 50 states plus the nation’s offshore possessions, such as the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, and the U.S. [read post]
20 Oct 2006, 1:49 pm
Transit Admin., No. 06-1029, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, 463 F.3d 50; 2006 U.S. [read post]
18 Jun 2018, 7:06 pm by MOTP
The arbitrator agreed with Rain & Hail that Jody James did not "timely present[] notice of its claim in accordance with the provisions of the crop insurance policy" and, further, "did not state a presentable loss" because crops from performing and non-performing farm units were commingled. [read post]
20 Aug 2011, 4:00 am
At issue was whether the district court erred in using the Penn Central Transportation Co. v. [read post]
5 Dec 2017, 12:01 pm by ligitsec
.; MOTOWN RECORD CO.; CAPITOL RECORDS, INC., Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.NAPSTER, INC., Defendant-Appellant.JERRY LEIBER, individually and doing business as, JERRY LEIBER MUSIC; MIKE STOLLER and FRANK MUSIC CORP., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.NAPSTER, INC., Defendant-Appellant. [read post]
14 Feb 2018, 2:57 pm by Kevin LaCroix
CalPERS appealed, asserting that its individual suit was timely because the three-year time limit was subject to equitable tolling pursuant to American Pipe & Construction Co. v. [read post]