Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that set forth the legal test used when U.S. federal courts must defer to a government agency's interpretation of a law or statute. [1]
The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) is a translation of the Bible in contemporary English. It was first published in 1989 by the National Council of Churches , [ 5 ] the NRSV was created by an ecumenical committee of scholars "comprising about thirty members".
Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner, 387 U.S. 136 (1967), was a case heard before the United States Supreme Court.The Court held that drug companies were not prohibited by the ripeness doctrine from challenging a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation requiring a prescription drug's generic name to appear on all related printed materials.
The Supreme Court of the United States has interpreted the Case or Controversy Clause of Article III of the United States Constitution (found in Art. III, Section 2, Clause 1) as embodying two distinct limitations on exercise of judicial review: a bar on the issuance of advisory opinions, and a requirement that parties must have standing.
Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence provides (in part): If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion ...
Eighth Amendment • death penalty • Sixth Amendment • right to jury determination of facts • reweighing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances by appellate court • retroactivity of constitutional rules on collateral or direct reviews
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case on February 15, 2019, fast-tracking it to hold oral arguments in April 2019 allowing them to rule on the matters by the end of term. [10] February 22, 2019, the court set the case for oral argument April 23, 2019 at 10 a.m. [11]
The Supreme Court ruled 5–4 to reverse the Ninth Circuit, ruling in favor of Sony. The ruling was largely focused on whether the technology in question had significant non-infringing uses, and how the plaintiffs were unable to prove otherwise. [1]