Ad
related to: colorado rule civil procedure 121
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Pullman abstention was the first "doctrine of abstention" to be announced by the Court, and is named for Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co., 312 U.S. 496 (1941).The doctrine holds that "the federal courts should not adjudicate the constitutionality of state enactments fairly open to interpretation until the state courts have been afforded a reasonable opportunity to pass on them."
The Judiciary of Colorado is established and authorized by Article VI of the Colorado Constitution as well as the law of Colorado.The various courts include the Colorado Supreme Court, Colorado Court of Appeals, Colorado district courts (for each of the 22 judicial districts), Colorado county courts (for each of Colorado's 64 counties), Colorado water courts, and municipal courts.
The Colorado Reporter (a Colorado-specific version of the Pacific Reporter) is an unofficial reporter for appellate decisions from 1883. [ 2 ] [ 3 ] Decisions of the Colorado Supreme Court were published in the official Colorado Reports from 1864 to 1980, and decisions of the Court of Appeals were published in the official Colorado Court of ...
The Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.) are a legal code of Colorado, the codified general and permanent statutes of the Colorado General Assembly. Publication.
In the Southwestern United States, water scarcity was (and remains) a critical problem. The McCarran Amendment, 43 U.S.C. § 666, was a statute enacted by United States Congress in 1952 [2] allowing the United States to be joined as a defendant in certain suits concerning the adjudication or administration of rights to use of waters.
Collateral estoppel (CE), known in modern terminology as issue preclusion, is a common law estoppel doctrine that prevents a person from relitigating an issue. One summary is that, "once a court has decided an issue of fact or law necessary to its judgment, that decision ... preclude[s] relitigation of the issue in a suit on a different cause of action involving a party to the first case". [1]
Early federal and state civil procedure in the United States was rather ad hoc and was based on traditional common law procedure but with much local variety. There were varying rules that governed different types of civil cases such as "actions" at law or "suits" in equity or in admiralty; these differences grew from the history of "law" and "equity" as separate court systems in English law.
But a civil action between Ms. Sanchez and a Mr. Smith would be "Sanchez v. Smith" if it were started by Sanchez, and "Smith v. Sanchez" if it were started by Mr. Smith (though the order of parties' names can change if the case is appealed). [1] Most countries make a clear distinction between civil and criminal procedure.