Search for: "Landgraf v. USI Film Products"
Results 1 - 20
of 27
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Jan 2023, 11:51 am
A Regulatory Increase to the Limits of Liability for Oil Pollution and an Amendment Exempting Small Passenger Vessels from the Limitation of Liability Act Present New Challenges for Vessel Owners U.S. maritime law experienced two significant changes on December 23, 2022—one pertaining to liability for oil pollution, the other concerning small passenger vessels. [read post]
24 Feb 2020, 3:02 pm
USI Film Products, should not apply at all to foreign countries, because foreign countries “generally are not guided in their policymaking by changes to U.S. law. [read post]
18 Feb 2020, 2:46 pm
USI Film Products, should apply to the FSIA. [read post]
1 Dec 2016, 3:32 pm
USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244 (1994), and adopted by this court in Commonwealth Edison Co. v. [read post]
1 Dec 2016, 3:32 pm
USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244 (1994), and adopted by this court in Commonwealth Edison Co. v. [read post]
5 Oct 2016, 5:40 pm
If Congress granted the President waiver authority, in order to comply with the Supreme Court’s decision in Landgraf v USI Film Products, Congress would need to be clear that the waiver applied retroactively to lawsuits that have already been filed, including the new suit filed earlier this week. [read post]
18 Aug 2016, 7:36 am
USI Film Products that a statute does not apply retroactively to conduct prior to the passage of the statute unless the statutory language “requires this result. [read post]
6 May 2016, 2:18 pm
USI Film Products (1994), the Supreme Court stated, "the court must ask whether the new provision attaches new legal consequences to events completed before its enactment. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 5:00 am
USI Film Products in determining whether an amended statute can be applied retroactively. [read post]
11 Jan 2015, 9:06 pm
USI Film Products, which he described as a scholarly discussion of why statutes should ordinarily not apply retroactively. [read post]
3 Dec 2014, 7:26 am
USI Film Products, which requires a three-step analysis in determining whether a statute applies retrospectively to pre-enactment conduct. [read post]
10 Nov 2014, 9:03 pm
The test of retroactivity is found in Landgraf v. [read post]
7 Aug 2014, 12:13 pm
Citing to the 1994 Supreme Court case Landgraf v. [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 7:18 pm
USI Film Prods., 511 U.S. 244, 270–71 (1994) (collecting cases); see also United States v. [read post]
14 Oct 2013, 6:35 am
USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244 (1994), implicitly overruled McNair v. [read post]
20 Jul 2011, 10:34 pm
USI Film Products. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 9:01 am
USI Film Products, noted that jurisdictional statutes may be applied in suits arising before their enactment without raising concerns about retroactivity. [read post]
5 Feb 2011, 7:14 pm
Its leading case in this area is Landgraf v. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 5:00 am
USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244 (1994). [read post]
25 May 2009, 8:29 am
USI Film Products to support its conclusion that Congress did not intend the PDA to apply retroactively and therefore, the denial of service credit for time away from work due to pregnancy was lawful. [read post]
