Search for: "In Re Class Action Application for Habeas Corpus" Results 1 - 20 of 49
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
CERCLA provides two mutually exclusive avenues for parties to recoup cleanup costs: cost-recovery actions and contribution actions. [read post]
22 Feb 2022, 6:06 pm by Patricia Hughes
Regulations under the War Measures Act provided that “the FLQ was outlawed and membership became a criminal act; normal civil liberties, including habeas corpus, were suspended, and arrests and detentions were authorized without charge”. [read post]
1 Nov 2021, 2:00 pm by Michael C. Dorf
In habeas corpus cases and qualified immunity cases, SCOTUS has articulated rules under which relatively minor shifts in the circumstances of application get described as "new rules" or not "clearly established. [read post]
6 Mar 2020, 9:40 am by Samantha Fry, Masha Simonova
This includes application for an order to show cause why the person should not be released or a hearing for remedies for breach of conditions of quarantine or isolation. [read post]
2 Oct 2019, 10:21 am by Deborah Heller
NantKwest, Inc. is the successor-in-interest as an assignee of its predecessor-in-interest’s application for a patent for a method of treating cancer cells, which was rejected for being obvious and thus not patentable. [read post]
3 Jun 2019, 4:54 am by MBettman
However, in 2011, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals granted Ayers’ petition for a writ of habeas corpus finding that the state had violated Ayers’ Sixth Amendment right to counsel by inducing Ayers to make incriminating statements without the assistance of counsel. [read post]
12 May 2019, 4:00 am by Administrator
Chhina, 2019 SCC 29 (37770) The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act fails to provide relief as broad and advantageous as habeas corpus, re legality of length and uncertain duration of detention. [read post]
2 Feb 2017, 1:22 pm by Andrew Hamm
Lynch, 803 F.3d 1165 (10th Cir. 2015) (wrote opinion) Decision of Board of Immigration Appeals inIn re Briones did not apply retroactively to bar alien’s application for adjustment of status. [read post]
23 Apr 2016, 10:08 pm by Jon
An inquestry shall consist of 23 citizens, with some spares, read in the law, selected at random from adult citizens of its jurisdiction, headed by a foreperson elected by its members, with power to hear any complaint from any person about the actions or conduct of any person or agency and to present its findings to the public or to appropriate agencies. [read post]
23 Apr 2016, 10:08 pm by Jon
The purposes of this Constitution include the following:1.1 To unite the peoples of the Band Republic into a permanent Union;1.2 To establish justice;1.3 To ensure domestic tranquility;1.4 To provide for the common defense;1.5 To promote the common welfare;1.6 To secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity.For these purposes we the people hereby do ordain and establish this Constitution, providing that any official action inconsistent with them is void.2. [read post]
4 Jan 2016, 8:00 pm by John Ehrett
United States has been “made retroactive” to second or successive petitions for habeas corpus within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. [read post]
22 Nov 2015, 1:30 pm by Gritsforbreakfast
  Well when I first saw it, it seemed like just an incredibly clever way to basically generate a class for a class action type litigation. [read post]
17 Jun 2015, 7:47 am by Steve Vladeck
" In Schor itself, Justice O'Connor emphasized that allowing the CFTC to entertain the small class of state-law counterclaims at issue "leaves far more of the 'essential attributes of judicial power' to Article III courts," since, among other things, the CFTC "does not exercise 'all ordinary powers of district courts,' and thus may not, for instance, preside over jury trials or issue writs of habeas corpus. [read post]
27 Dec 2014, 2:19 am by Ben
So, blocking orders: fine so long as they're reasonable! [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 2:20 pm by John Elwood
And on that lyric note, we’re done for the week. [read post]
13 Feb 2014, 8:07 am by Jane Chong
In his Boumediene opinion, Justice Kennedy expressly rejected the detainees’ contention that § 2241(e)(1) refers to one class of claims (habeas) and § 2241(e)(2) refers to another class of claims (“any other action . . . . [read post]