Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A remand may be a full remand, essentially ordering an entirely new trial; when an appellate court grants a full remand, the lower court's decision is "reversed and remanded." Alternatively, it may be "with instructions" specifying, for example, that the lower court must use a different legal standard when considering facts already entered at ...
In light of this, on June 27, the Supreme Court granted Limon's petition, vacated the ruling of the Kansas Court of Appeals, and remanded the case for further consideration. After the Court of Appeals again upheld the law, the Kansas Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and unanimously struck down the part of the law excluding same-sex sexual ...
A vacated judgment is usually the result of the judgment of an appellate court, which overturns, reverses, or sets aside the judgment of a lower court. An appellate court may also vacate its own decisions. Rules of procedure may allow vacatur either at the request of a party (a motion to vacate) or sua sponte (at the court's initiative). [1]
On remand, the Seventh Circuit now granted habeas relief to Corcoran, indicating that the state courts should reconsider its sentence in order to comply with state law. The Supreme Court vacated the Seventh Circuit's ruling. The Court ruled that Federal courts may only grant a writ of habeas corpus if a violation of federal law is found.
568 U.S. 1 Decided November 5, 2012. Fourth Circuit vacated and remanded. The Supreme Court vacated a Fourth Circuit ruling that a civil rights plaintiff who had been awarded an injunction, but not monetary damages, was not entitled to attorney's fees as a "prevailing plaintiff" under 42 U.S.C. §1988. The Court ruled that the plaintiff was indeed a "prevailing plaintiff" within the meaning of ...
Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330 (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court vacated and remanded a ruling by United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on the basis that the Ninth Circuit had not properly determined whether the plaintiff has suffered an "injury-in-fact" when analyzing whether he had standing to bring his case in federal court. [1]
The Supreme Court vacated this order and remanded the case for further review, finding that a burden of a retrial three decades after the crime "should not be imposed unless each ground supporting the state court decision is examined and found to be unreasonable under [the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996]."
The Second Circuit affirmed, but two of the judges urged the Supreme Court to overrule some of its tribal sovereign immunity precedents. After the Supreme Court granted certiorari, the tribe passed an ordinance consenting to taxation, and the Court vacated and remanded. [42] Oneida Indian Nation of New York v. County of Oneida (2d Cir. 2010)