 |
| Find dockets from Federal trial courts. |
|
|
|
|
|
Election 2008
Will There Be A Hollywood Ending To The Dramatic Story Of Clinton Vs. Obama?
by JOHN W. DEAN
Presidential Candidates vs. Hate
Why Obama And McCain Should Repudiate The Messages Of Their Extremist Religious Endorsers
by MARCI HAMILTON
|
|
|
| Real-Time SEC Edgar Filings |
| Enter all or part of the company's name or ticker symbol. You can also search for companies grouped by Standard Industrial Classification codes: |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| US Supreme Court |
|
- YEAGER v. UNITED STATES [08-67]
- WONG v. BELMONTES [08-1263]
Criminal Law & Procedure, Habeas Corpus, Sentencing
In capital habeas proceedings, a circuit court's order requiring the petition to be granted is reversed where petitioner did not establish that defense counsel prejudiced petitioner by providing him ineffective assistance at the penalty phase of his trial, because petitioner failed to show a reasonable probability that the jury would have rejected a capital sentence after it weighed the entire body of mitigating evidence against the entire body of aggravating evidence. - SAFFORD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST. #1 v. REDDING [08-479]
|
|
| US Court of Appeals - Ninth Circuit |
|
- LEGAL AID SERVICES OF OREGON v. LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION [11/23]
Constitutional Law, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Government Law
In a First Amendment challenge to restrictions on lobbying, soliciting clients, participating in class actions, and seeking attorneys' fees imposed on legal aid organizations that received federal grants through the Legal Services Corporation, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the regulations did not discriminate against any particular viewpoint or motivating ideology; and 2) plaintiffs' professed fear that their federal funding might be terminated was not sufficient to support an as-applied challenge. - BARBARA BOOSE v. TRI-COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSP [11/23]
Administrative Law, Civil Rights, Health Law, Transportation
In an action alleging that the Americans with Disabilities Act required public transit systems to make certain modifications to their programs for disabled riders, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) if the Attorney General was not permitted to make rules about scheduling paratransit trips by vehicle type, then neither could he make rules that effectively required paratransit systems to schedule trips by vehicle type; and 2) the Department of Transportation's public transportation regulations did not adopt and incorporate the Department of Justice's regulations wholesale. - DELANO FARMS COMPANY v. CALIFORNIA TABLE GRAPE COMMISS [11/20]
Agriculture, Constitutional Law, Food & Beverages, Government Law
In a First Amendment challenge to a state statutory scheme requiring grape growers to fund generic advertising, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where the state agricultural commission's promotional activities constituted government speech that was immune to challenge under the First Amendment.
|
|
*PDF Format |
|
|
|
|
|
