Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Jarkesy – which was decided the day prior and limited the ability of agencies to impose penalties through internal tribunals instead of jury trial in court – were seen as cumulation of the current Supreme Court's efforts to weaken the administrative state as part of a conservative agenda against big government. [21] [22]
As of 2018, the Supreme Court had overruled more than 300 of its own cases. [1] The longest period between the original decision and the overruling decision is 136 years, for the common law Admiralty cases Minturn v. Maynard, 58 U.S. (17 How.) 476 decision in 1855, overruled by the Exxon Corp. v. Central Gulf Lines Inc., 500 U.S. 603 decision ...
New York v. Trump is a civil investigation and lawsuit by the office of the New York Attorney General (AG) alleging that individuals and business entities within the Trump Organization engaged in financial fraud by presenting vastly disparate property values to potential lenders and tax officials, in violation of New York Executive Law § 63(12).
A pre-enforcement challenge under the Federal Constitution to Texas Senate Bill 8—the Texas Heartbeat Act—may proceed past the motion to dismiss stage against certain of the named defendants but not others; the order of the District Court is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the case is remanded. United States v. Texas: 21-588: ...
NRDC won the case in a federal court, but the Supreme Court overturned that decision and ruled in favor of Chevron on the grounds that the courts should broadly defer to EPA and other independent regulatory agencies. Chevron was one of the most important decisions in U.S. administrative law and was cited in thousands of cases. [4]
The court considered and rejected various forms of relief. The actual damage was not quantifiable, nominal damages were a hollow alternative, and punitive damages after a jury trial would be speculative and unusual. Even if recovered they would bear no relation to either the government's irreparable loss or Snepp's unjust gain.
Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. 868 (2009), is a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires judges to recuse themselves not only when actual bias has been demonstrated or when the judge has an economic interest in the outcome of the case but also when "extreme facts" create a "probability of bias."
Marrita Murphy and Daniel J. Leveille, Appellants v. Internal Revenue Service and United States of America, Appellees (commonly known as Murphy v.IRS), [1] is a tax case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit originally held that the taxation of emotional distress awards by the federal government is unconstitutional.