Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
An anti-money laundering law called the Corporate Transparency Act, or CTA, is now back in action after a Dec. 23 court ruling that will require millions of small business owners to register with ...
Canterbury v. Spence, 464 F.2d. 772 (D.C. Cir. 1972): In medical malpractices cases, informed consent is required of the patient and no expert is required for the case to be heard by a jury. Acree v. Republic of Iraq, 370 F.3d 41 (D.C. Cir. 2004): Established the FSIA did not create new causes of action against foreign states.
The Court of Tax Appeals (Filipino: Hukuman ng Apelasyon sa Buwis [2]) is the special court of limited jurisdiction, and has the same level with the Court of Appeals.The court consists of 8 Associate Justices and 1 Presiding Justice.
California Teachers Association, a labor union; California Technology Agency, a California cabinet-level state agency; Call to Action, a Christian organization; Canadian Transportation Agency, an independent tribunal of the Government of Canada
The United States Court of International Trade (case citations: Ct. Int'l Trade) is a U.S. federal court that adjudicates civil actions arising out of U.S. customs and international trade laws. [1] Seated in New York City , it exercises broad jurisdiction over most trade-related matters, and is permitted to hear and decide cases anywhere in the ...
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Pages for logged out editors learn more
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 ...
The US Supreme Court held that the tax was lawful. Holmes J dissented on reasoning, not result, joined by Brandeis J.. The plaintiff's reliance is upon Allgeyer v.Louisiana, 165 U. S. 578, 17 S. Ct. 427, 41 L. Ed. 832, in which it was held that a fine could not be imposed by the State for sending a notice similar to the present to an insurance company out of the State.