Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 is a multidistrict litigation (MDL) lawsuit that seeks redress for the victims of the September 11 terrorist attacks and their families. The suit is currently pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York .
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 ...
In re: Don McGahn (also: Committee on the Judiciary, United States House of Representatives v. Donald F. McGahn II ; U.S. House Judiciary Committee v. Donald F. McGahn ) is a U.S. constitutional case lawsuit (1:19-cv-02379) filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia by the House Judiciary Committee to compel the ...
By November 27, 2020, more than thirty of the legal challenges filed since Election Day had failed; [40] by December 14, 2020, over fifty lawsuits had been dismissed. Federal judges in Georgia and Michigan rejected last-ditch efforts by pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell to overturn the election results on December 7, 2020. [ 41 ]
An early example of this was a hugely intensive, multichannel propaganda effort to persuade the world that Russia bore no responsibility for the shooting down of [Malaysian Airlines flight] MH-17 (an outright falsehood: we know beyond any reasonable doubt that the Russian military supplied and subsequently recovered the missile launcher)".
In re Bilski; Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit: Full case name: In re Bernard L. Bilski and Rand A. Warsaw : Argued: May 8 2008: Decided: October 30 2008: Citation: 545 F.3d 943, 88 U.S.P.Q.2d 1385: Case history; Prior history: Claims rejected, Ex parte Bilski (BPAI 2006), appealed to CAFC, en banc hearing ordered ...
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.
This has since been overruled by Foskett v McKeown [2001] 1 AC 102, where the House of Lords held that the beneficiary has the option of choosing an equitable lien or a constructive trust in the case of a mixed fund. [1] A constructive trust would allow a claim in the new asset in proportion to the contribution of the beneficiary's trust fund.