Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
There are 13 circuit courts of appeals in the United States; a U.S. court of appeals only binds courts in their circuit. In United States federal courts, a circuit split, also known as a split of authority or split in authority, occurs when two or more different circuit courts of appeals provide conflicting rulings on the same legal issue. [1]
As a general matter, suits involving most federal laws are tried in one of the courts of regional-based federal courts of general jurisdiction - first in the 94 United States district courts, which are trial courts, with appeals made to the 14 United States courts of appeals ("circuit courts"), which are the intermediate appellate courts ...
The courts opinion arguably created a circuit split because while the Ninth Circuit and DC Circuit had held the CFPB's structure to be constitutional, the Fifth Circuit in Collins v. Mnuchin (2018) held that the structure of the Federal Housing Finance Agency—an agency that had a director who was structurally similar to CFPB's—was not.
The Court did, however, acknowledge a circuit split on this question, citing a case [5] from the Fifth Circuit where that court found that such statements are the "functional equivalent" of a prohibited opinion on mental state. [2] Despite this, the Ninth Circuit, bound by its precedent, [6] upheld Diaz's
The 2-1 decision, delivered Friday by the DC Circuit federal appeals court, establishes how severe the punishments can be for January 6 rioters convicted of low-level charges.
Case history; Prior: United States v. Upjohn Co., 600 F.2d 1223 (6th Cir. 1979); cert. granted, 445 U.S. 925 (1980). Holding (1) District Court's test, of availability of attorney–client privilege, was objectionable as it restricted availability of privilege to those corporate officers who played “substantial role” in deciding and directing corporation's legal response; (2) where ...
Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), is a landmark [1] United States Supreme Court civil rights decision in which the Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against discrimination because of sexuality or gender identity.
The ruling effectively undoes a lower court’s ruling that the recent 15-week ban from 2022 superseded the 1864 law. State Rep. Matt Gress, who also backed a 15-week abortion ban, condemned the ...