Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Discretionary jurisdiction is a power that allows a court to engage in discretionary review. This power gives a court the authority to decide whether to hear a particular case brought before it. Typically, courts of last resort and intermediate courts in a state or country will have discretionary jurisdiction. [1]
The constitutional issue involved the question of whether the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to hear the case. [51] The Judiciary Act of 1789 gave the Supreme Court original jurisdiction in cases involving writs of mandamus. So, under the Judiciary Act, the Supreme Court would have had jurisdiction to hear Marbury's case.
After granting a writ of certiorari and accepting a case for review, the justices may decide against further review of the case. For example, the Court may feel the case presented during oral arguments did not present the constitutional issues in a clear-cut way, and that adjudication of these issues is better deferred until a suitable case ...
A case may alternatively come before the court as a direct appeal from a three-judge federal district court. [203] The party that petitions the court for review is the petitioner and the non-mover is the respondent. Case names before the court are styled petitioner v. respondent, regardless of which party initiated the lawsuit in the trial court.
Four Justices must agree to hear a case for the Court to take it up. The Supreme Court receives about 7,000 to 8,000 petitions filed each term, and will decide about 80 cases on average.
The Court's appellate jurisdiction is given "with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make." Often a court will assert a modest degree of power over a case for the threshold purpose of determining whether it has jurisdiction, and so the word "power" is not necessarily synonymous with the word "jurisdiction". [14] [15]
In 1988, Congress further limited appeals with the Supreme Court Case Selections Act, eliminating the right of appeal from certain state court decisions construing federal law. A similar model holds in most U.S. state judiciaries, with discretionary review only available to the state's supreme court, and the appeals courts bound to hear all ...
First, the Court has held that the clause identifies the scope of matters which a federal court can and cannot consider as a case (i.e., it distinguishes between lawsuits within and beyond the institutional competence of the federal judiciary), and limits federal judicial power only to such lawsuits as the court is competent to hear. For ...