Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Clean hands, sometimes called the clean hands doctrine, unclean hands doctrine, or dirty hands doctrine, [1] is an equitable defense in which the defendant argues that the plaintiff is not entitled to obtain an equitable remedy because the plaintiff is acting unethically or has acted in bad faith with respect to the subject of the complaint—that is, with "unclean hands".
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 judicial decisions, and the federal courts almost always are required to use the FRCP as their rules of civil procedure.
Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm Incorporated [1] was a noted American antitrust case, in which the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) accused Qualcomm's licensing agreements as anticompetitive, mainly because their practices excluded competition and harmed competitors in the modern chip market, which according to the FTC, violated both Section 1 and Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
The Federal Tort Claims Act (August 2, 1946, ch. 646, Title IV, 60 Stat. 812, 28 U.S.C. Part VI, Chapter 171 and 28 U.S.C. § 1346) ("FTCA") is a 1946 federal statute that permits private parties to sue the United States in a federal court for most torts committed by persons acting on behalf of the United States.
The Supreme Court would go on to impose on both federal and state legislation a firm judicial hand on property and economics right until the Great Depression in the 1930s. [18] The Court typically invalidated statutes during the Lochner era (named after Lochner v. New York) by declaring the statutes in violation of the right to contract. [18]
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (in case citations, 2d Cir.) is one of the thirteen United States Courts of Appeals. Its territory covers the states of Connecticut, New York, and Vermont, and it has appellate jurisdiction over the U.S. district courts in the following federal judicial districts: District of Connecticut
Section 15 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 provided: [A]ll the said courts of the United States, shall have power in the trial of actions at law, on motion and due notice thereof being given, to require the parties to produce books or writings in their possession or power, which contain evidence pertinent to the issue, in cases and under circumstances where they might be compelled to produce the ...
(b) As used in this section . . . (2) The term "extortion" means the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened . . . fear, or under color of official right. [74] The Hobbs Act's definition of "extortion" was "copied from the New York Code substantially."