Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
PACER (acronym for Public Access to Court Electronic Records) is an electronic public access service for United States federal court documents. It allows authorized users to obtain case and docket information from the United States district courts , United States courts of appeals , and United States bankruptcy courts .
As of January 2012, there were "some two hundred" courts running CM/ECF. [3] PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records), the Federal Judiciary's electronic public access system, still provides access to docket entries as it did before CM/ECF; however, CM/ECF allows for access to pleadings, motion papers, briefs, and other documents filed ...
Early federal and state civil procedure in the United States was rather ad hoc and was based on traditional common law procedure but with much local variety. There were varying rules that governed different types of civil cases such as "actions" at law or "suits" in equity or in admiralty; these differences grew from the history of "law" and "equity" as separate court systems in English law.
Rules of civil procedure often state that the court clerk shall record certain information "on the docket" when a specific event occurs. [citation needed] The Federal Courts use the PACER (Public Access Court Electronic Records) system to house dockets and documents on all federal civil, criminal and bankruptcy cases, available to the public ...
Most U.S. states frown upon renvoi in a choice of law situation. In this example, they would insist that the only law the courts of State X should look at is the law of contracts of State Y, not the "whole law" of State Y, which includes that state's law governing choice of law. The basic criticism of renvoi is that it can lead to an endless ...
Both civil (also known as Roman) and common law systems can be considered the most widespread in the world: civil law because it is the most widespread by landmass and by population overall, and common law because it is employed by the greatest number of people compared to any single civil law system.
Whether within the intent of Congress or not when adopting 28 USC 724 (1934), the situation was effectively reversed in 1938, [2] the year the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure took effect. Federal courts are now required to apply the substantive law of the states as rules of decision in cases where state law is in question, including state ...
Until 1938, federal courts in the United States followed the doctrine set forth in the 1842 case of Swift v.Tyson. [2] In that case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that federal courts hearing cases brought under their diversity jurisdiction (allowing them to hear cases between parties from different U.S. states) had to apply the statutory law of the states, but not the common law developed by ...