Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
[1] [2] In 1996, the Supreme Court discussed the appropriateness of GVR orders and upheld their use in a per curiam opinion in the case Lawrence v. Chater. [3] An example of the Supreme Court issuing a GVR order is the case of Kansas v. Limon. Under Kansas state law, statutory rape charges involving minors were greatly reduced if both parties ...
The lawsuit was a challenge to a 2011 regulation of the Federal Reserve Board setting the maximum fees that large banks can charge merchants for a debit-card transaction, [1] but the question before the Supreme Court was limited to whether the case was properly dismissed because of the statute of limitations. [2]
If the appellate court finds no defect, it "affirms" the judgment. If the appellate court does find a legal defect in the decision "below" (i.e., in the lower court), it may "modify" the ruling to correct the defect, or it may nullify ("reverse" or "vacate") the whole decision or any part of it.
The "Supreme Court" style is designed for more lengthy, in-depth articles, but either structure is acceptable. The most significant difference between the "Supreme Court" style and the "Opinion of the Court" style is that the "Supreme Court" style contains the arguments section while the "Opinion of the Court" style keeps oral arguments in the ...
Federal appellate courts, including the Supreme Court, have the power to "remand [a] cause and ... require such further proceedings to be had as may be just under the circumstances." [1] This includes the power to make summary "grant, vacate and remand" (GVR) orders. [2] Appellate courts remand cases whose outcome they are unable to finally ...
In Iowa, on August 30, 1978, the Iowa Supreme Court threw out the lower court decisions and ruled in favor of both Fisher and the attorney general. As a result, First National filed an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court on September 11 and hired Robert H. Bork to argue its Minnesota case before the justices.
Ohio v. American Express Co., 585 U.S. ___ (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case regarding the nature of antitrust law in relationship to two-sided markets.The case specifically involves policies set by some credit card banks that prevented merchants from steering customers to use cards from other issuers with lower transaction fees, forcing merchants to pay higher transaction fees to ...
Smiley v. Citibank, 517 U.S. 735 (1996), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding a regulation of the Comptroller of Currency which included credit card late fees and other penalties within the definition of interest and thus prevented individual states from limiting them when charged by nationally-chartered banks.