Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Fifth Circuit gained appellate jurisdiction over the United States District Court for the Canal Zone. On October 1, 1981, under Pub. L. 96–452, the Fifth Circuit was split: Alabama, Georgia, and Florida were moved to the new Eleventh Circuit. On March 31, 1982, the Fifth Circuit lost jurisdiction over the Panama Canal Zone, which was ...
Smith v. Pilots Union, 296 F.3d 380 (5th Cir. 2002): Six-month period of limitations applies to Smith's suit against the Union whether or not he was a supervisor. McCorvey v. Hill, 385 F.3d 846 (5th Cir. 2004): Original party to the decision in Roe v. Wade lacked standing to have the case re-opened after 30 years. Horvath v.
Second, only a complaint that states a plausible claim for relief survives a motion to dismiss. Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief will, as the Court of Appeals observed, be a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense.
But the 2-1 5th Circuit panel on Friday disagreed and said NICA's claims stemmed from the Inflation Reduction Act, not the Medicare law, meaning that it was not required to bring its case before HHS.
The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated late Thursday a nationwide injunction that had been issued this month by a federal judge in Texas who had concluded the Corporate ...
It ruled on two areas which affirmed, reversed, and vacated the Fifth Circuit's decision in parts and remanded the case for further review. On the subject of the constitutionality of the FHFA director, the Court ruled 7–2 to uphold the Fifth Circuit's decision that, as with Seila Law and the CFPB, the inability for the President to terminate ...
(The Center Square) – A panel of three judges on the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Texas in a lawsuit filed over its concertina wire barriers. The court ruled 2-1 in a ...
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009), was a United States Supreme Court case which held that plaintiffs must present a "plausible" cause of action. Alongside Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (and together known as Twiqbal), Iqbal raised the threshold which plaintiffs needed to meet.