Search for: "Matter of Cert. of a Question of Law"
Results 21 - 40
of 1,612
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jun 2012, 9:26 am
The questions presented are: 1. [read post]
30 Mar 2009, 8:00 am
For the Supreme Court to come out in Nacchio's favor, it will have to find that the information known to Nacchio was immaterial as a matter of law. [read post]
10 Jul 2013, 8:22 am
According to the dissent, Air Wisconsin thus was entitled to immunity as a matter of law. [read post]
28 Mar 2011, 8:40 am
The Supreme Court this morning granted cert in Hosanna Tabor Church v. [read post]
27 Oct 2014, 10:13 am
What matters for present purposes is that there’s no division in the way the law is being applied in different parts of the country, and so no need for the Supreme Court to intervene now. [read post]
14 Nov 2023, 9:22 am
Testimony on Questions of Law. [read post]
1 Nov 2011, 6:26 am
That question is harder to answer. [read post]
21 Feb 2015, 11:31 am
Whether the lawyers involved in this matter will be allowed to continue practicing law at Foley & Lardner in the long term is something that only time will tell. [read post]
9 Oct 2022, 9:15 am
Supreme Court entered an order list in which it denied petitions for writ of certiorari in several cases involving questions under U.S. patent law. [read post]
9 Oct 2022, 9:15 am
Supreme Court entered an order list in which it denied petitions for writ of certiorari in several cases involving questions under U.S. patent law. [read post]
21 Jan 2013, 1:39 am
The determination matters because of the possibility it presents that the plaintiffs could pursue these state law claims in circumstances in which federal statutory and case law would not permit such claims. [read post]
10 Feb 2023, 11:58 am
Nearly three years ago, the Supreme Court held that this power to hear legal questions includes the ability to investigate “mixed questions of law and fact. [read post]
21 Oct 2022, 10:40 am
The post In Puerto Rico horse-racing dispute, a looming question over independent contractors appeared first on SCOTUSblog. [read post]
11 Jul 2009, 8:49 am
Ok, I haven't posted to this blog in a very, very long time, but I don't blog anywhere else, so I just had to state how absolutely amazingly awesome it will be for anyone interested in constitutional law (which, after all, is anyone who reads this blog--or any law blog for that matter) if the Supreme Court grants cert. in the Chicago guns case AND phrases a question for review on whether the Slaughterhouse Cases should be overturned. [read post]
10 Nov 2015, 5:30 am
This bold effort squarely presents a question circling around academic circles for years: whether the USPTO has the authority to address section 101 (subject matter eligibility) within Covered Business Method (CBM) reviews. [read post]
30 Jun 2020, 9:06 am
cert. petitions in Vermont and Maine cases raising the matter, with... [read post]
17 Jun 2013, 3:55 pm
A couple of general points:(1) The petition doesn’t even bother to respond to JudgeGregory’s race-based opinion in the 4th Circuit—perhaps presuming, correctly, that any Justice who would find even one word of Gregory’s rant persuasive would never vote to grant cert anyway.(2) The petition frames the question for the Court in a narrow manner: “Whether police officers who conspire with a prosecutor to fabricate evidence for subsequent use are immune… [read post]
4 Oct 2018, 12:02 pm
News that the US military might be tasked with staying in Syria in a post-Islamic State mode (in order to counterbalance or even drive out the Iranian military presence) raises some hard questions both as a matter of the UN Charter and domestic separation of powers law. [read post]
25 Oct 2015, 1:40 pm
Roche (Meso Scale petition & app) In a new petition for cert, Meso Scale asks the following simple question: Whether a covenant, promise, or agreement not to sue for the infringement of a federal patent is a license of that patent as a matter of federal law. [read post]
18 May 2017, 8:00 am
Back in 2013, I wrote a post about whether the voluntariness of consent to search or seize under the Fourth Amendment should be treated as a matter of fact or a question of law for purposes of the standard of review on appeal. [read post]
