Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In the legal system in the United States, In re is used to indicate that a judicial proceeding may not have formally designated adverse parties or is otherwise uncontested. In re is an alternative to the more typical adversarial form of case designation, which names each case as "Plaintiff v. (versus) Defendant", as in Roe v. Wade or Miranda v ...
A background article written by CNN's legal analyst & Supreme Court biographer Joan Biskupic who details the decision-making process leading to the landmark court decision in R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Archived from the original on November 13, 2020. Retrieved on November 24, 2020.
In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001, 310 F.3d 717 (2002), is a per curiam decision by the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review in which it reviewed restrictions that were placed upon a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) application by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) on May 17, 2002.
In the Matter of the Marriage of J.B. and H.B. was a case arising from a divorce petition filed by a same-sex couple in Texas. They had been married in Massachusetts. A Texas Family Court granted the petition, holding that Texas's Proposition 2, which prohibited the court from recognizing a same-sex marriage, violated the due process and equal protection guarantees of the Fourteenth Amendment ...
Chancellor Chandler held that there was no liability without bad faith. He repeated the In re Caremark International Inc. Derivative Litigation standard of 'utter failure' establishing a lack of good faith, [1] which was approved further in Stone v.
In re Caremark International Inc. Derivative Litigation, 698 A.2d 959 (Del. Ch. 1996), [1] is a civil action that came before the Delaware Court of Chancery. It is an important case in United States corporate law and discusses a director's duty of care in the oversight context.
In re A.C., 573 A.2d 1235 (1990), was a District of Columbia Court of Appeals case. It was the first American appellate court case decided against a forced Caesarean section , although the decision was issued after the fatal procedure was performed. [ 1 ]
Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, 591 U.S. 1 (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held by a 5–4 vote that a 2017 U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) order to rescind the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) immigration program was "arbitrary and capricious" under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and ...