Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
This is a list of special or exceptional tribunals and courts for the trying of people. [1] Sometimes, courts that do not try people but curtail political freedoms are also derogatorily called "special tribunals," [ 2 ] as well as courts that establish a privileged jurisdiction for powerful individuals or the government. [ 3 ]
Drug courts are separated into categories such as adult drug court, juvenile drug court, DWI court, and veteran's treatment court. [9] [10] Traditional courts focus on what happened, decide whether the person committed a crime, and punish the person proportionately. [11] [12] Specialized courts focus on reducing future rearrests and ...
The law of contracts varies from state to state; there is nationwide federal contract law in certain areas, such as contracts entered into pursuant to Federal Reclamation Law. The law governing transactions involving the sale of goods has become highly standardized nationwide through widespread adoption of the Uniform Commercial Code .
The jurisdictional scope of commercial courts outside the United States [63] may have some differences with American state level specialized business and commercial courts. For example, the Business and Property Courts of England and Wales include specialized courts or lists for admiralty, [123] insolvency, [124] and patents, [125] which in the ...
Until 1938, federal courts in the United States followed the doctrine set forth in the 1842 case of Swift v.Tyson. [2] In that case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that federal courts hearing cases brought under their diversity jurisdiction (allowing them to hear cases between parties from different U.S. states) had to apply the statutory law of the states, but not the common law developed by ...
Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States, 593 F.2d 907 (10th Cir. 1976): Abstention to prevent duplicative litigation between state and federal courts; reversed by the Supreme Court. Thompson v. Johnson County Community College, 108 F. 3d 1388 (10th Cir. 1997): Worker privacy in bathrooms or changing rooms. United States v.
In contrast, Kunzi in his book Army Law downplays the early expansion of the doctrine of Christian, "Although Christian was cited in over 100 court and board decisions between 1963 and 1976, in only one of these decisions did an adjudicator incorporate a mandatory contract clause into a contract. In every other decision, the court or board ...
The losing party may appeal a decision by either a board of contract appeals or the United States Court of Federal Claims to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. [12] A contractor is entitled to interest on the amount found due on its claim running from the date the Contracting Officer received the claim until the claim is paid. [13]