When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Standard of review - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_of_review

    Additionally, in some areas of substantive law, such as when a court is reviewing a First Amendment issue, an appellate court will use a standard of review called "independent review." [citation needed] The standard is somewhere in between de novo review and clearly erroneous review. Under independent review, an appellate court will reexamine ...

  3. Acceptance of responsibility - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceptance_of_responsibility

    Whether or not a defendant has accepted responsibility for his crime is a factual determination to which most circuits have decided to apply the "clearly erroneous" standard of review. [7] The guideline commentary states, "The reduction of offense level provided by this section recognizes legitimate societal interests.

  4. Trial de novo - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_de_novo

    Generally, the proper standard of review for employee benefit decisions, such as the denial of benefit claims, is de novo. Also, where the appellate court undertakes judicial review of compulsory arbitration proceedings that were required by statute, the reviewing court must conduct a de novo review of the interpretation and application of the ...

  5. Appellate procedure in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appellate_procedure_in_the...

    For example, Connecticut applies the following standard to review unpreserved claims: 1.the record is adequate to review the alleged claim of error; 2. the claim is of constitutional magnitude alleging the violation of a fundamental right; 3. the alleged constitutional violation clearly exists and clearly deprived the defendant of a fair trial ...

  6. First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Options_of_Chicago...

    The Court also held that courts of appeals should apply ordinary standards when reviewing district court decisions upholding arbitration awards, i.e., accepting findings of fact that are not "clearly erroneous" but deciding questions of law de novo; they should not, in those circumstances, apply a special "abuse of discretion" standard. [2]

  7. Markman hearing - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markman_hearing

    In 2015, the Supreme Court addressed the de novo review standard. [15] In Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Supreme Court reversed their decision in Cybor and held that the appellate court must defer to factual findings of the lower court unless the findings were "clearly erroneous."

  8. AOL Mail

    mail.aol.com

    Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!

  9. Harmless error - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmless_error

    Standard of review; References This page was last edited on 16 February 2024, at 16:44 (UTC). Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike ...