Ad
related to: section 362 criminal code of federal court cases today news
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Despite the automatic stay of collection efforts imposed by section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code, Lendgreen continued to request repayment of the loan provided. [ 2 ] [ 3 ] In response to this, Coughlin would move to file a motion before the Bankruptcy Court requesting an automatic stay while the Tribe opted to file a 'motion to dismiss' Coughlin ...
The federal judge presiding over the case, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta for the District of Columbia Circuit, has said he plans to rule on the issue by the summer, according to a court filing ...
This case is used to teach law students the requirements necessary for the service of process. The textbook Civil Procedure: Cases, Materials, and Questions (8th Edition) cites the case in the third chapter, stating: [5] When the marshal's office does serve process, the plaintiff may be required to instruct the marshal on how to do so. In Mayo v.
Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana: Full case name: UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. IMPERIAL PETROLEUM, INC.,CARAVAN TRADING,BRIAN CARMICHAEL,CIMA ENERGY GROUP, CIMA GREEN, CHAD DUCEY, CRAIG DUCEY, JOSEPH FURANDO, EVELYN KATIRINA PATTISON,JEFFREY WILSON : Decided
The case extends from an ongoing federal case to determine whether then-President Donald Trump and others engaged in election interference during the 2020 election, including events during the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. It is the first time a case concerning criminal prosecution for alleged official acts of a president was ...
Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court affirmed a defendant's right to have a competency evaluation before proceeding to trial. [1] The Court outlined the basic standards for determining competency. [2]
Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972), was a landmark criminal case in which the United States Supreme Court decided that arbitrary and inconsistent imposition of the death penalty violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
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!