Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
It is often said that the role of intervenors is to "assist" the court in making a just decision on the dispute at hand. It is true that judges sometimes indicate that intervenors have aided the court in reaching a decision, the use of the word "assist" can be seen as misleading in that it implies the intervenor is acting altruistically.
The lawsuit named as defendants the Attorney General of British Columbia, the Attorney General of Canada, and two groups of intervenors who opposed the plaintiffs' claim. . These groups, named by Steeves as "Patient Intervenors" and "Coalition Intervenors," were, respectively, a four-person group of non-expert citizens who said they "experienced harm while being treated by physicians engaging ...
The role of an amicus was described by Lord Justice of Appeal Cyril Salmon in Allen v Sir Alfred McAlpine & Sons Ltd [1968] 2 QB 229 at p. 266 F-G: . I had always understood that the role of an amicus curiae was to help the court by expounding the law impartially, or if one of the parties were unrepresented, by advancing the legal arguments on his behalf.
Full case name: Gilles Doré v. Pierre Bernard, in his capacity as Assistant Syndic of the Barreau du Québec, Tribunal des professions and Attorney General of Quebec: Citations: 2012 SCC 12: Docket No. 33594 [1] Prior history: Judgment against Doré in the Court of Appeal for Quebec. Ruling: Appeal dismissed. Holding
Full case name: Timothy B. Bostic, et al., Plaintiffs - Appellees, Christy Berghoff, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated; et al., Intervenors v. George E. Schaefer, III, in his official capacity as the Clerk of Court for Norfolk Circuit Court, and Janet M. Rainey, in her official capacity as State Registrar of Vital Records,
The defendants and intervenors then petitioned the Eighth Circuit for a re-hearing en banc, which the Eighth Circuit granted. The Eighth Circuit, sitting en banc, vacated the preliminary injunction and remanded the case to the district court for future proceedings. [22]
Hollingsworth v. Perry was a series of United States federal court cases that re-legalized same-sex marriage in the state of California. The case began in 2009 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, which found that banning same-sex marriage violates equal protection under the law.
The Supreme Court of the United States handed down nine per curiam opinions during its 2021 term, which began October 4, 2021 and concluded October 2, 2022.. Because per curiam decisions are issued from the Court as an institution, these opinions all lack the attribution of authorship or joining votes to specific justices.