|
| |
| | Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. |
 | | The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed. | | | The court need not conclude that the agency construction was the only one it permissibly could have adopted to uphold the construction, or even the reading the court would have reached if the question initially had arisen in a judicial proceeding. | | | The Court of Appeals ultimately held that this plantwide approach was prohibited by the 1970 Act, see ASARCO Inc., 188 U.S.App.D.C. at 83-84, 578 F.2d at 325-327. |
|
http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0467_0837_ZO.html
(7333 words)
|
|
| |
| | Eagle Forum and Cato Institute Amicus in Eldred v. Ashcroft |
| | As this Court observed in United States v. | | | The broad circuit split regarding whether supplemental amicus arguments not expressly adopted by the parties may be considered by the courts of appeals should be resolved by this Court. | | | 9 IN THE S S S Suuuupreme Court of the United S preme Court of the United S preme Court of the United S preme Court of the United Sttttates ates ates ates ERIC ELDRED, et al., Petitioners, v. |
|
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/eldredvashcroft/cert/eagle-amicus.html
(4185 words)
|
|
| |
| | Watkins v. United States |
| | The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded to the District Court with instructions to dismiss the indictment. | | | The District Court denied motions to dismiss the indictments in United States v. | | | Prior thereto, several state courts had held that legislative investigations were subject to the witness' privilege not to accuse himself under state constitutions. |
|
http://www.tourolaw.edu/patch/Watkins
(10391 words)
|
|
| |
| | Moot Court Brief of Chimene Keitner and Travis LeBlanc for Petitioner |
| | Moot Court Brief of Chimene Keitner and Travis LeBlanc for Petitioner | | | The Court came to this conclusion in Feist, stating that “The sine qua non of copyright is originality. | | | Petitioners brought suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking relief on the grounds that the CTEA exceeds Congress’s power under the Copyright Clause and violates the First Amendment of the Constitution. |
|
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/eldredvashcroft/reference/yale-mootcourt.html
(10913 words)
|
|
| |
| | MAY 28, 1999 COURT DECISION |
| | The Arch court, however, based its holding on the premise that, contrary to OSM's position, a permit block is an "action, suit or proceeding for the enforcement of any civil fine, penalty, or forfeiture," without considering whether the Congress in enacting SMCRA intended to exempt such blocks from section 2462. | | | United States, 169 F.3d 21, 32 (D.C. Cir. | | | The appeals court upheld several provisions of the rule, but invalidated others. |
|
http://www.osmre.gov/courtdecision052899.htm
(3117 words)
|
|
| |
| | [No title] |
| | We agree and affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals. | | | n4 The Court of Appeals remanded the case to the District Court for consideration of petitioners' remaining challenges to the DOL regulations. | | | The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit reversed, holding that the legislative-veto clause is severable from the remainder of the EPP program. |
|
http://www.law.mercer.edu/elaw/alaska.html
(7064 words)
|
|
| |
| | New York Times Co. v. United States (1971) |
| | I believe that the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit should [748] be affirmed and the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit should be reversed insofar as it remands the case for further hearings. | | | The order of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is reversed and the case is remanded with directions to enter a judgment affirming the judgment of the District Court for the Southern District of New York. | | | If the United States were to have judgment under such a standard in these cases, our decision would be of little guidance to other courts in other cases, for the material at issue here would not be available from the Court's opinion or from public records, nor would it be published by the press. |
|
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/nytvus.html
(11970 words)
|
|
| |
| | Rules-1996 "Registration and Reregistration Application Fees" |
| | On November 22, 1995, the District Court remanded the matter to DEA for proceedings consistent with the opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. | | | The United States' obligations under the conventions are recognized in the specific language of the CSA and the implementing regulations (see 21 USC 801, 801(a), 811(d)(1), 823(a) and 958(a), and 21 CFR 1307.02). | | | The case may be referred to the United States Attorney's Office or State's Attorney for civil or criminal prosecution. |
|
http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/rules/1996/fr12301996.htm
(7186 words)
|
|
| |
| | Rules -2002 "Registration and Reregistration Application Fees" |
| | The district court remanded the matter to DEA for proceedings consistent with the appeals court opinion on November 22, 1995. | | | The appeals court remanded this action to the district court with instructions on August 29, 1995. | | | The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit noted that in establishing the DDCFA, Congress left intact the fee collection requirements of 21 U.S.C., confirming boundaries of the DCP that DEA can fund by registration fees. |
|
http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/rules/2002/fr0809a.htm
(9106 words)
|
|
| |
| | [No title] |
| | Superior Court, she held that a peace officer is statutorily entitled to view adverse comments in his personnel file and file a written response to a background investigation of the officer during probationary employment. | | | Superior Court, she allowed a claim by insured employers against a workers= compensation insurer for misallocating the plaintiffs= claims expenses and reporting that misinformation to a ratemaking organization, resulting in higher premiums for plaintiffs. | | | Workerâs Compensation Appeals Board she upheld the role of the workerâs compensation appeals board in applying a stringent standard of âindustrial causationâ for a workerâs injury, thereby showing that the state has a proper role in ensuring the safety of workers. |
|
http://judiciary.senate.gov/member_statement.cfm?id=989&wit_id=2628
(927 words)
|
|
| |
| | Kent v. United States |
| | Held: The Juvenile Court order waiving jurisdiction and remitting petitioner for trial in the District Court was invalid. | | | As a juvenile, he was subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the District of Columbia Juvenile Court unless that court, after "full investigation," should waive jurisdiction over him and remit him for trial to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. | | | On appeal, petitioner raised, among other things, the validity of the Juvenile Court's waiver of jurisdiction; the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed, finding the procedure leading to waiver and the waiver order itself valid. |
|
http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0383_0541_ZS.html
(446 words)
|
|
| |
| | [No title] |
| | And the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has read Section 109(b)(1) of the CAA as barring the EPA from considering even technological feasibility, ruling that the sole objective of the CAA is to protect public health. | | | United States, 276 U.S. at 404, 406, 410-11. | | | United States, 488 U.S. Even if that were so, it would not justify adjusting the Constitution's commitment to the vesting of "all" legislative powers in a Congress of the United States, as provided for in Article 1, Section 1. |
|
http://www.wjopc.com/site/constitutional/browner.html
(5965 words)
|
|
| |
| | DEA's Brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals - November 6, 1995 - Part 1 |
| | A. However, after the petitioner appealed, DEA voluntarily asked this court to remand the petition for a ruling. | | | 8Thus, the Deputy Administrator was correct in stating that "[w]hether or not marijuana is a source of delta-9-THC is irrelevant to the status of marijuana under the CSA." A. Despite the petitioner's assertions, this statement is not inconsistent with United States v. | | | In that case, the court granted DEA's motion for remand. |
|
http://www.druglibrary.org/olsen/DEA/dea95.html
(5262 words)
|
|
| |
| | Olsen's Reply Brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals - December 4, 1995 |
| | The United States is bound by this treaty and the ____________________ | | | This international rescheduling procedure allowed the United States to reschedule dronabinol, although the DEA is claiming that only the specific isomer dronabinol (and only when made synthetically) in sesame oil and encapsulated in a soft gelatin capsule was actually rescheduled. | | | This court must first resolve the inconsistency of the scheduling of coca and opium poppy under the statute. |
|
http://mojo.calyx.net/~olsen/DEA/reply95.html
(3739 words)
|
|
| |
| | [No title] |
| | The relevant regulation states as follows (the sentences Trans Union omits are in italics): Any advice given by the Commission is without prejudice to the right of the Commission to reconsider the ques- tions involved and, where the public interest requires, to rescind or revoke the action. | | | A footnote to the title of this portion of its brief states: The Order is replete with statements unsupported by the evidence.... | | | Greenmoss Builders, Inc., 472 U.S. 749 (1985), the Supreme Court held that a consumer reporting agency's credit report warranted reduced constitutional protection because it concerned "no public is- sue." Id. at 762. |
|
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200104/00-1141a.txt
(3435 words)
|
|
| |
| | The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Today Addressed Rural Telephone Carrier ... |
| | Although the court found that any failure to comply with the APA was harmless, the court held that the FCC had failed to consider the impact of its action on small wireless carriers and rural telephone companies as required by the RFA. | | | In the Wireless Case (which involved the obligations of wireless carriers to port numbers to one another), the Court determined that the obligations imposed by the FCC flowed from its previous number portability order and that the Wireless-to-Wireless Order, therefore, was an interpretive order that did not require further action under the APA or RFA. | | | Now that the court has stayed the enforcement of the Intermodal Order, the FCC will have to consider rural rating and routing issues that have been pending for years. |
|
http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2005/Mar/1124668.htm
(1146 words)
|
|
| |
| | [No title] |
| | BellSouth and Columbia each filed petitions for reconsideration of the MSD order, arguing that to allow an applicant providing only non-wireline service to apply for frequencies set aside for providers of "landline" service would violate the plain meaning of the regulation. | | | Finally, MobileTel argues that the Commission acted arbitrarily and capriciously in dismissing its applications because MobileTel and Columbia had arrived at a settlement agreement, and the Commission failed to consider the possibility that dismissing MobileTel's application would contravene the purpose of the Commission's directives encouraging mutually-exclusive applicants to create such agreements. | | | The WTB later recused itself from further participation in the licensing proceeding for reasons unrelated to the issues in this appeal, and the Commission's Office of General Counsel assumed responsibility for making recommendations to the Commission on the remanded matters. |
|
http://www.fcc.gov/ogc/documents/opinions/1997/mobiltel.html
(2563 words)
|
|
| |
| | United States District Court for the District of Columbia |
| | United States District Court for the District of Columbia | | | Also, no cameras, camera phones, or recording devices permitted in the Courthouse. | | | October 28, 2005: In Re: Special Counsel Investigation |
|
http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov
(136 words)
|
|
| |
| | CADC Internet - Home |
| | July 21, 2004 Notice of proposed amendment to the Court's Plan to Implement the Criminal Justice Act of 1964 ("CJA") | | | October 6, 2005 - Notice of Proposed Circuit Rule Change | | | May 20, 2005 - Notice of Proposed Circuit Rule Changes |
|
http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/internet.nsf
(52 words)
|
|
|
