Ad
related to: court cases legal case summary example free pdf document editor applegal-pleading-template.pdffiller.com has been visited by 1M+ users in the past month
A tool that fits easily into your workflow - CIOReview
- Make PDF Forms Fillable
Upload & Fill in PDF Forms Online.
No Installation Needed. Try Now!
- Online Document Editor
Upload & Edit any PDF Form Online.
No Installation Needed. Try Now!
- Edit PDF Documents Online
Upload & Edit any PDF File Online.
No Installation Needed. Try Now!
- Convert PDF to Word
Convert PDF to Editable Online.
No Installation Needed. Try Now!
- Make PDF Forms Fillable
Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court.Written by Associate Justice William Rehnquist, the decision of the Court held that a party moving for summary judgment need show only that the opposing party lacks evidence sufficient to support its case.
Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision involving First Amendment free speech protections for government employees. The plaintiff in the case was a district attorney who claimed that he had been passed up for a promotion for criticizing the legitimacy of a warrant.
Dickerson is regarded as a significant example of a rare departure by the Court from the principle of party presentation. [2] The Court noted that neither party in the case advocated on behalf of the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 3501, [3] the specific statute at issue in the case.
Ricci v. DeStefano, 557 U.S. 557 (2009), is a United States labor law case of the United States Supreme Court on unlawful discrimination through disparate impact under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Among the other conservative and originalist court members were Samuel Alito, who had sat as a circuit judge on the three-judge appellate panel and dissented from the court's invalidation of the spousal notification in Casey; [35] and Clarence Thomas, who believes the court's use of substantive due process to confer rights is a "legal fiction ...
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court set forth the legal test for determining whether courts should grant deference to a government agency's interpretation of a statute that it administers.
The District Court ruling aroused significant controversy among patent law experts and observers of the telecommunications industry. The jury's decision was described as being "Apple-friendly" by Wired and a possible reason for the increased costs—because of licensing fees to Apple—that subsequently affected Android smartphone users. [ 32 ]
Oregon v. Mitchell, 400 U.S. 112 (1970), was a U.S. Supreme Court case in which the states of Oregon, Texas, Arizona, and Idaho challenged the constitutionality of Sections 201, 202, and 302 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) Amendments of 1970 passed by the 91st United States Congress, and where John Mitchell was the respondent in his role as United States Attorney General. [1]