Datasets:

coastalcph

/

lex_glue

like 50

Follow

CoAStaL NLP Group 28

[ "recognizing that the department is required to present clear and convincing evidence to support termination of a parents parental rights", "holding parental rights are constitutionally protected fundamental interest", "recognizing this substantial interest in context of termination of parental rights", "recognizing that protracted litigation regarding parental rights is detrimental to children", "holding that evidence did not support termination of parental rights to two children despite mothers prior conviction for killing her stepchild" ]

[ "holding that the 120day judicial appeal period is not subject to waiver or forfeiture by the secretary", "holding that issue of whether the 120day judicialappeal period prescribed by 38 usc 7266a for seeking judicial review of a board decision is subject to equitable tolling is a legal question", "holding that a failure to file an appeal is within the scope of the waiver because the failure does not undermine the validity of the plea or waiver", "holding that the right to support is not subject to waiver by either parent", "holding that due process right to present a defense is subject to forfeiture if not properly asserted in the trial court" ]

[ "holding that federal common law of erisa preempts state law in the interpretation of erisa benefit plans", "holding that plaintiffs failure to prove decedents death was caused by the wrongful acts of the defendant precludes any recovery of wrongful death damages under mississippis wrongful death statute", "holding that erisa preempts wrongful death and state common law actions when plaintiff asserts insurers delay in authorization of procedure caused the patients death", "holding unconstitutional a state wrongful death statute which denied illegitimate children the right to recover for the wrongful death of their mother", "recognizing cause of action for wrongful death" ]

[ "holding that the drug tax violated the privilege against selfincrimination", "holding that waiver of privilege against selfincrimination is proceeding specific", "holding that the eleventh amendment does not bar the united states from asserting an indemnity claim against a state", "recognizing commonlaw privilege against selfincrimination", "holding state procedural rule requiring trial objections could not bar an appellant from asserting a violation of his constitutional privilege against selfincrimination" ]

[ "holding that a notice of appeal filed in an adversary proceeding could not appeal the main proceeding", "holding that the special relationship exception does not apply to the relationship between a student and a school", "holding that the judicial privilege does not apply to an allegation concerning a school teacher made by an adult former student before commencement of any quasijudicial proceeding and without an intent that it lead to a quasijudicial proceeding", "holding that a statutory basis is necessary for an administrative body to initiate reconsideration of its prior final quasijudicial decisions", "holding that a workers compensation proceeding is a legal proceeding" ]

[ "recognizing fundamental principle that utility rates are set for the future and not the past", "recognizing that when a defendants negligence causes bodily injury the plaintiff can recover damages for past present and future medical expenses bodily injury and emotional distress", "holding plaintiff must move before public interests are involved to bring suit for ejectment but allowing single action for past present and future damages", "holding that prejudgment interest may properly be added to damage awards for past lost wages medical expenses that have been incurred and past pain and suffering but not future loss of earnings future medical expenses andor future pain and suffering", "holding that debtor was liable to the commonwealth for past and future cleanup costs" ]

[ "holding that a defendant proceeding pro se is bound by same rules as party represented by counsel and a court cannot allow pro se litigant lower standard of performance", "holding that courts must construe pro se filings liberally", "holding that the appellant could not incorporate district court filings into his appellate brief by reference and that his pro se status did not except him from such established rules", "holding that nonlawyer proceeding pro se could not represent his children", "holding that although pro se briefs are liberally construed even pro se litigants must brief arguments in order to preserve them" ]

[ "holding that commentary in the guidelines manual that interprets or explains a guideline is authoritative unless it violates the constitution or a federal statute or is inconsistent with or a plainly erroneous reading of that guideline", "holding a sentence is not based on the guidelines unless the plea agreement itself expressly uses a guidelines sentencing range to establish the term of imprisonment", "recognizing the guidelines commentary is authoritative", "holding that commentary in sentencing guidelines that interprets or explains a guideline is authoritative unless it violates the constitution or a federal statute or unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the guideline it interprets", "holding that sentencing guidelines commentary must be given controlling weight unless it violates the constitution or a federal statute or is plainly inconsistent with the guidelines itself" ]

[ "recognizing that although provision of municipal service is not fundamental right inequitable provision of that service is subject to equal protection analysis", "holding that an attempted service on the partys counsel was insufficient without proof of the counsels actual authority to receive service", "holding that fdcpa statutory damages did not predominate over the requested equitable relief because given the defendants net worth and the number of class members each class member would be entitled to receive only 025 in statutory damages", "holding because legislature knew how to include terms within statutory definition and did not do so statutory definition did not include terms in light of the terms contemporaneous inclusion of the same terms in a separate provision", "holding that section 1201 is moneymandating and that when the terms of the statutory provision are met the service member is entitled to receive compensation" ]

[ "holding that underlying complaints filed by several plaintiffs all contained express allegations of property damage and that because all complaints arose from the same set of circumstances the allegations in any single complaint can be inferred in the other complaints", "holding that the trial court properly refused to consider allegations in the disallowed amended complaints", "holding that the trial court properly struck the amended complaint when the plaintiff offered no reason to refute the trial courts finding that the new allegations in the amended complaint were based on facts the plaintiff had known since the beginning of the action", "holding leave to amend was properly denied where the relator had previously filed two amended complaints", "holding that the trial court properly refused defendants instruction because it invaded the province of the jury" ]

[ "holding that the fact of a prior conviction for sentencing purposes need not be proved to a jury or admitted by defendant to satisfy the sixth amendment", "recognizing that jurors have the right to reject that part of the evidence believed by them to be untrue and to accept that found by them to be true", "holding death sentence need not be pending in order for this court to engage in review of issues on appeal", "holding that ajets need not be perfectly similar in order for evidence of them to be admitted under rule 404", "holding that the 1979 policy interpretation need not be approved by the president in order to become effective as it is not a rule regulation or order" ]

[ "holding that article x 2 of the california constitution dictates the basic principles defining water rights that no one can have a protectible interest in the unreasonable use of water and that holders of water rights must use water reasonably and beneficially", "holding that 1926b prohibited munici pality from using its annexation of territory within rural water district as springboard for providing its own water service to residents", "holding municipal condemnation of water associations facilities and certificate violative of 1926b", "holding substantial completion had occurred because water district took possession of all the lines filled them with water and began using them to serve the customers of the water district", "holding that village could not condition provision of water services on annexation where prospective customer was within a rural water associations service area and the water association was federally indebted" ]

[ "holding that disbarment is the presumptively appropriate sanction under both the florida standards for imposing lawyer sanctions and case law when a lawyer misappropriates trust funds", "holding that a finding of bad faith on the part of the offending lawyer is a prerequisite for imposing sanctions under 1927", "holding that even where a client was more sophisticated in business matters than the lawyer himself the lawyer should have assumed the client was relying on the lawyer for the legal aspects of the loan from the client to the lawyer to the same extent that the client would rely on the lawyer for advice were the client making the loan to a third person", "holding that disbarment was the appropriate sanction for an attorneys repeated material misrepresentations", "holding that disbarment was the appropriate sanction where an attorney misappropriated funds from his real estate partners" ]

[ "holding that arrest made with probable cause and without excessive force does not give rise to iied claim", "recognizing the defense of good faith and probable cause in 1983 case involving unconstitutional warrantless arrest", "holding that in a 1983 action issue of probable cause is for the jury", "recognizing that warrantless arrests with probable cause do not give rise to 1983 claims", "holding 1983 action lies for warrantless arrest without probable cause" ]

[ "holding that rule was not violated where officer stated he made a report but was unable to find it because there was no report to tender to counsel", "holding that a plaintiff did not complain to the eeoc pursuant to official duties but rather as a citizen", "holding that pursuant to garcetti plaintiffs speech made in the course of his official duties was unprotected as a matter of law", "holding that speech was pursuant to official duties because plaintiff conceded at oral argument that as an internal affairs officer he had a broad responsibility to investigate and report police misconduct", "holding police officer is a public official" ]

[ "holding that plaintiff failed to establish pretext where plaintiff was terminated after the employer conducted an investigation into a subordinates allegations of misconduct on the part of the plaintiff and believed the allegations to be true even though plaintiff presented evidence in the lawsuit that the allegations may have been false", "holding that where the employer fired the plaintiff upon a good faith belief that he sexually harassed coworkers the plaintiff could not prove pretext by challenging the harassment allegations", "holding that the district court did not err in finding that the plaintiff failed to provide adequate notice of new allegations where the plaintiffs complaint gave the defendants no notice of the specific factual allegations presented for the first time in the plaintiffs opposition to summary judgment", "holding that a plaintiff failed to state a claim based on conclusory allegations that a locality failed to adequately supervise officers in the proper use of force where the complaint provided no factual allegations of known widespread conduct by the localitys employees comparable to that alleged as to the plaintiff", "holding that evidence of other allegations of torture was inadmissible in part because it was not similar to the allegations made by defendant" ]

[ "holding that unsuccessful job applicant for governmental employment had due process right to meaningful administrative appeal of rejection when regulations established right to such appeal", "recognizing a right of access to civil proceedings", "holding that an applicant who fails to satisfy the lower standard of proof for asylum necessarily fails to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal", "holding that a plaintiff has no absolute unconditional right of access to the courts and no constitutional right of access to prosecute frivolous or malicious actions", "holding that the applicant failed to satisfy the statute because the applicant did not have an ownership right or access right to the reservoir site" ]

[ "holding that the ex post facto clause has no application to deportation", "holding that application of a judicial decision was not an ex post facto violation when the decision did not redefine any crimes defenses or punishments", "holding that state work release regulation was not an ex post facto law", "holding that the supreme courts ex post facto precedents do not clearly establish that amended section 29336 violates the ex post facto clause", "holding application of successor statute regarding registration of sexual predator was regulatory and not an ex post facto violation" ]

[ "holding that the insurer had no duty to defend the insured because the allegations of the initial complaint did not allege facts which would bring the case within the coverage of the title insurance policy", "holding that the litigation privilege did not prohibit the plaintiffs false imprisonment claim because the confinement did not occur during the course of the judicial proceedings nor in an effort to prosecute or defend the lawsuit", "holding in the context of an attorney malpractice suit an insurance company is not vicariously liable for the acts of the attorney it selects to defend the insured while the insurer selected the attorney to defend the insureds and controlled the ultimate decision to settle or defend under the policy there is nothing in the record to indicate the insurer had any control over the details of the litigation as it was being conducted by the the attorney", "holding that even though the offense was not of a sexual nature requiring the defendant to register as a sex offender following his conviction for false imprisonment of a minor was rationally related to the government interest in protecting the public and did not violate the defendants right to due process or equal protection under the law", "holding that plaintiffs did not have standing because they did not sue the party with the clear ability to act" ]

[ "holding that the use of the word shall in the extradition clause and the extradition act creates a mandatory duty", "holding the word individuals is not the equivalent of the dictionary acts use of the word persons", "holding that the word may in the declaratory judgment act does not mean shall ", "holding that the use of the word shall in 1285a of subchapter ii of the act imposes a mandatory duty on the administrator to allot all the amounts authorized to be appropriated", "holding that a states use of the word shall is mandatory language" ]

[ "holding that inquiry as to whether officers are entitled to qualified immunity for use of excessive force is distinct from inquiry on the merits of the excessive force claim", "holding that exhaustion requirement applies to excessive force claims", "holding that the use of excessive force does not constitute a prison condition in the ordinary sense of the term", "holding that excessive force claims are to be treated under the fourth amendment", "holding that excessive rain excused delay under the contracts force majeure clause as a condition outside of the sellers control" ]

[ "holding foreign insurance company was supercorporation engaged in underwriting and selling insurance policies through its subsidiaries", "holding that subcontractors primary and excess insurance policies must pay first and before contractors own insurance", "holding that notice and a hearing were required before the commissioner of insurance could require an insurance company to change its definition of at fault in order to secure approval of an increase in insurance rates", "holding claims for negligent procurement of insurance accrued on date the insured purchased the insurance policies", "holding negligent failure to notify regulatory body of lapse of insurance policy did not arise out of underwriting of insurance" ]

[ "holding that the fourth amendment does not mandate the payment of money by the united states", "holding that the doctrine of sovereign immunity barred a claim for money damages against the librarian of congress in his official capacity because immunity had not been waived and the exceptions to immunity did not apply", "holding that the united states department of justice waived its immunity from money damages under subsection a", "holding that exhaustion is required under the plra even if the plaintiff seeks only money damages and money damages are not available as relief", "holding a claim for injunction but not money damages against a state officer for a violation of the age discrimination in employment act enacted under article i section 8 of the united states constitution was not barred by sovereign immunity under the ex parte young exception" ]

[ "recognizing that either party to a divorce action may bring in third parties who claim an interest in the property alleged to be community or third parties themselves may intervene and have their rights therein determined", "holding that a plaintiff must allege either an interference with specific third parties or an identifiable class of third persons", "holding the family court has jurisdiction to join third parties when property is alleged to be marital but is owned by a third party", "holding appeal not moot where bankruptcy proceedings involved third parties but unlike robehs farms and rochman v northeast utils serv group in re pub serv co 963 f2d 469 1st cir1992 the reorganization plan is not a complex billiondollar affair that has affected innumerable third parties", "holding there is no duty to third parties on the part of a premises owner who could not have foreseen the criminal acts of third parties" ]

[ "holding cotenants consent to search valid where rodriguez who was asleep inside the house was not asked for his consent if police reasonably believed the consenter possessed common authority over the premises", "holding that the agents superficial and cursory questioning of the consenting party did not disclose sufficient information for the agent reasonably to believe that she had common authority over the premises and that further inquiry was required under rodriguez", "holding that mother who was resident of house shared with adult daughter could give valid consent to search premises", "holding that consent to search premises includes consent to search washing machine on those premises", "holding that there is no violation of the fourth amendment when the government reasonably believed that the individual giving consent to the search had authority to do so" ]

[ "holding defendant waived right to challenge incourt identification when he admitted guilt at punishment phase of trial", "holding that trial court erred when it admitted outofcourt identification of defendant when the witness who made the identification was never asked about defendants identity at trial", "holding an incourt identification made with the defendant sitting next to his attorney at the counsels table is so clearly suggestive as to be impermissible", "holding when the defendant timely objected to an incourt identification by an eyewitness the trial judge should have directed the government to provide an outofcourt lineup or other protective procedure to avoid an impermissibly suggestive incourt identification", "holding that witness had an independent basis to support incourt identification where the description made prior to any pretrial identification was substantially an accurate description of the defendant" ]

[ "holding owner of company qualified as an employer due to inter alia his authority to hire and fire employees and overall financial control of company", "holding owner of limited liability company may be personally liable to third party if owner acts as agent for company and fails to disclose existence and identity of principal", "holding that a company exercising substantial control of the terms and conditions of the work of the employees is an employer under the flsa", "holding that the responsibility of another did not absolve the plaintiff of his own responsibility where the plaintiff helped incorporate the company served as vice president and president owned varying levels of stock and possessed authority to hire and fire", "holding in context of control person analysis that because defendant founded the company and was its largest shareholder he may be able to influence the company" ]

[ "holding that a nonmember who files a civil claim in an indian tribal court consents to tribal jurisdiction", "recognizing the inherent power of indian tribes to exercise criminal jurisdiction over all indians", "holding that indian tribes lack tribal jurisdiction over crimes committed by nonmember indians within the tribes reservation", "holding that indian tribes could only exercise criminal jurisdiction over tribal members and not other indians", "holding that an indian tribes exercise of criminal jurisdiction over nonindians is inconsistent with the domesticdependent status of the tribes and that tribes may not assume such jurisdiction without congressional authorization" ]

[ "holding that the undisputed fact that manufacturer complied with federal safety standards weighed against punitive damages", "holding that a reduction in punitive damages to comply with the due process clause is a federal constitutional issue not a fact issue requiring jury consideration", "holding that indemnification by excess liability insurer for punitive damages imposed on drug manufacturer contrary to public policy", "holding a court may not award punitive damages", "holding that punitive damages could not be granted because punitive damages are a matter of substantive law and substantive state law must yield to federal limitations" ]

[ "holding antiwaiver provision of securities laws does not prevent enforcement of contract provision choosing english forum", "holding federal law does not prevent a state from choosing between prospective operation of its decision and that of relation backward", "holding that puffery is not actionable under the securities laws", "holding that in interpreting a contract we look to the conflict of laws rules of the forum state to determine which states laws will be controlling", "holding that provision of securities exchange act allowing injunction against one who is violating or will violate securities laws does not confer subject matter jurisdiction over dispute with individual not accused of such violations" ]

[ "holding that it is incumbent upon the trial court to enter into the record findings of fact and conclusions that the manner of payment is reasonable and one which defendant can afford", "holding that before admitting rule 80324 hearsay statements the trial court must enter in the record appropriate statements rationale or findings of fact and conclusions of law", "holding that a trial courts judgment must comply with the statutory requirement that the judgment contain written findings of fact and conclusions of law", "holding district court abused its discretion in admitting state court findings of fact", "holding court must conduct new trial absent parties consent where deceased judge had not issued findings of fact and conclusions of law before death" ]

[ "holding that information of criminal activity given by a known reliable informant is enough to sustain a terry stop", "holding that evidence was sufficiently reliable because there was corroboration", "holding that due to the reliable and unique quality of an individuals fingerprint fingerprint evidence by itself is enough to support a criminal conviction", "holding that it was sufficient that the government submitted unchallenged certified records of conviction and other clearly reliable evidence", "holding that a judicial confession in a guilty plea is itself sufficient evidence to support the crime charged" ]

[ "holding that a radiological technologist was entitled to compensation for the fifteen minutes spent before her shift each day turning on the xray processing machine letting it warm up and performing tests on the machine because the proper performance of her job required this preparatory work to be completed when the first walkin patient could potentially arrive", "holding the government proved the defendant had a reasonable opportunity to observe the minor when among other things he spent twenty minutes taking pictures of her for her backpage ad", "holding that it was proper for the medical examiner to estimate the victims time of death based on the results of her investigators lividity test as it was standard procedure for her to rely on tests performed by members of her office", "holding that the something more requirement was met when after a factory worker complained to her supervisor that her machine was not operating properly the workers supervisor told her to go back to work quit whining and just deal with it", "holding that an applicant who convincingly demonstrated that she could not rely on the authorities to protect her from her fathers abuse and that by turning to governmental authorities for help her circumstances may well have worsened was not required to report private persecution to government authorities to qualify for asylum" ]

[ "holding that a psychiatrist owed a duty to a person foreseeably injured by his patient", "holding that psychiatrist has duty to third parties to exercise due care in treatment and release of committed patients", "holding that when a psychiatrist determines or should determine that a patient poses a serious threat of danger to a third party the psychiatrist has a duty of reasonable care to that party", "holding that a psychiatrist had no duty to detain a patient who killed himself and injured his wife because the patient was outside of the scope of the facilitys range of observation and control even when the psychiatrist agreed to treat the patient the patient had suicidal tendencies and the psychologist took the patient into custody but then later permitted him to leave", "holding that psychiatrist had duty to protect individuals endangered by his epileptic patient" ]

[ "holding that a manufacturers insert in and of itself may not establish the relevant standard of care in a medical negligence action but may be considered by the fact finder along with expert testimony to define the standard of care", "holding that appellate court could not review the sufficiency of the evidence based on a particular legal standard because that standard was not submitted to the jury and no party objected to the charge on this ground or requested that the jury be charged using this standard", "holding experts testimony was insufficient to survive summary judgment because the testimony at most showed the defendant deviated from the experts personal standard of care rather than the generally accepted standard of care", "recognizing that a defendant physicians own practice was at least some evidence of the standard of care and concluding that the case was properly submitted to the jury notwithstanding the plaintiffs failure to call an independent expert on the standard of care", "holding that standard of care need not be listed separately in report when same standard applies to each health care provider" ]

[ "holding that notice to supervisor is notice to city", "holding that notice to the attorney of record constitutes notice to the petitioner", "holding that actual notice fulfills a notice requirement that an applicable federal regulation be conspicuously posted because actual notice is the best notice", "holding that a defendant is not entitled to relief from default judgment because notice to an attorney of filing of motions and orders is constructive notice to the client even when the client did not have actual notice", "holding that notice to original attorney not formally withdrawn comprised proper notice" ]

[ "holding criminal conspiracy is sustained where the commonwealth establishes the defendant entered into an agreement to commit or aid in an unlawful act with another person with a shared criminal intent and an overt act was done in furtherance of the conspiracy a coconspirator may commit the overt act and conspirators are liable for acts of the coconspirators committed in furtherance of the conspiracy", "holding that the conspiracy theory of personal jurisdiction requires that the outofstate coconspirator was or should have been aware of the acts performed in the forum state in furtherance of the conspiracy", "holding that admission of evidence of activity not done in furtherance of the conspiracy was harmless error where defendants participation was fully established by the testimony of another coconspirator", "holding that proof of overt act is not required to support admission of evidence of statement of coconspirator during course of conspiracy", "holding that error from the erroneous admission of evidence was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendants guilt" ]

[ "holding that a trial witnesss testimony as to the credibility of another witness was prejudicial error", "holding that a witnesss testimony or an exhibit may not explicitly and directly contain an opinion as to a trial witnesss credibility", "holding that hospitalization of witnesss wife and his desire to be by her side was not a substantial basis for admitting witnesss testimony from first trial", "holding that agents testimony as to witnesss identification was not hearsay", "holding that it was not erroneous for committing court to refuse to admit an affidavit from a private investigator that provided evidence of a witnesss lack of credibility when the affidavit would not have explained away the witnesss testimony but only challenged its credibility" ]

[ "holding that an issue not presented to the trial court will not be considered on appeal", "holding that a deposition that was not presented to the trial court could not be considered on appeal", "holding that a party may not raise a claim on appeal that was not presented to the trial court", "holding appellants issue was rendered moot because appellant was given the opportunity to make a record in support of his motion for new trial and appellate court considered that record in disposing of only issue raised in the motion for new trial", "holding where record fails to establish whether and how appellant presented motion for new trial to the trial court it was not timely presented" ]

[ "holding that trial court properly granted directed verdict when plaintiffs allegations were insufficient to state cause of action under the dtp a", "holding that because the tendered expert witness was a licensed psychologist and not a medical doctor he was not qualified to state an expert medical opinion regarding the cause of johns injury", "recognizing that a motion for directed verdict should be granted when there is no reasonable evidence upon which a jury could legally predicate a verdict in favor of the nonmoving party", "holding that a directed verdict in defendants favor was appropriate where plaintiff s expert was able to state his opinion regarding the cause of plaintiffs injuries only in terms of possibility but not of probability", "holding that the trial court erred in granting the school boards posttrial motion for directed verdict because although the school board timely moved for a directed verdict during trial it did not serve its motion for directed verdict until the eleventh day after the verdict" ]

[ "holding postdeprivation remedy is adequate even when deprivation was intentional", "holding that doctrine does not violate due process", "holding that theft by prison guards does not violate due process when postdeprivation remedy exists", "holding that deprivation of property does not violate due process if a meaningful postdeprivation remedy is available and explaining that state tort actions are meaningful postdeprivation remedies", "holding that a prison guards intentional destruction of a prisoners possessions did not give rise to a federal due process claim because state law provided an adequate postdeprivation tort remedy" ]

[ "holding district courts finding of voluntary consent not clearly erroneous when police encounter lacked drawn weapons threats or prolonged questioning and consent was given without reluctance or hesitation even though police did not advise defendant of right to refuse consent", "holding that police may approach persons and ask questions or permission to search so long as police do not imply that answers or consent are required", "holding consent involuntary when police told defendants grandmother they had a search warrant and she allowed them to enter and search", "holding that police must prior to entering the home inform the person from whom consent is sought that he or she may lawfully refuse to consent to the search", "holding that it was objectively reasonable for the police to conclude that the general consent to search the respondents car included consent to search a bag within that car" ]

[ "holding that possession of more than seven tons of marijuana justified the district courts refusal to provide a simple possession instruction", "holding that a past arrest for possession without more is simply not enough to provide reasonable articulable suspicion that the person is currently in possession", "holding that possession of a pistol in public requires knowing possession", "recognizing innocent possession defense to a charge of criminal weapons possession", "holding that evidence of appellants prior gun possession was admissible in a homicide prosecution to show malice and intent possession of a gun without more is not wrongful conduct" ]

[ "holding that the pleading standard set forth in twombly applies to all civil actions", "holding that where a complaint pleads facts that are merely consistent with a defendants liability it stops short of the line between possibility and plausibility of entitlement to relief ", "holding that twombly and iqbals plausibility standard applies", "holding that the preponderance of the evidence standard applies to 523 claims", "recognizing the circuit split and applying the subjective standard as more stringent without deciding which standard applies" ]

[ "holding that the trial court had continuing jurisdiction over all subsequent custody orders once the trial court acquired jurisdiction", "holding that the trial court had jurisdiction to grant rule 37 relief where petitioner herred was in custody at the time the court ruled on his motion", "holding that a motion for rule 37 sanctions is dispositive", "recognizing for the first time that the habeas court had the power to retain the petitioner in conditional custody before granting relief", "holding that the district court and this court had subject matter jurisdiction over the defendants motion for modification of sentence based on amendment 706 even though the defendant filed the motion before march 3 2008 because the district court ruled on the motion after that date" ]

[ "holding jones act insufficiently clear to abrogate immunity", "holding that congress could abrogate the eleventh amendment pursuant to the commerce clause", "holding that in an earlier version of 11 u s c 106 congress had failed to make sufficiently clear its intent to abrogate state sovereign immunity", "holding that congress must speak with a clear statement if it intends to abrogate an international agreement", "holding that congress had no power under article i to abrogate state sovereign immunity" ]

[ "holding that this courts statutorily mandated proportionality review concerns whether a particular death sentence is excessive per se or is substantially out of line", "holding that the failure to hold a faretta hearing is per se reversible error and reversing the defendants conviction vacating his death sentence and remanding for a new trial", "holding that per se statutory rule is not permissible under fourth amendment", "holding such agreements to be per se illegal", "holding that denial of access per se is noncompensable" ]

[ "holding that the contracts clause article i section 10 clause 1 to the united states constitution does not apply to the actions of the federal government", "holding no violation of federal establishment clause", "holding that elections clause and the necessary and proper clause combine to provide congress with the power to regulate mixed federal and state elections even when federal candidates are running unopposed", "holding that state court could regulate the practice of law in federal courts located in the state", "holding that the power to regulate the business of another and especially of a competitor is a denial of rights safeguarded by the due process clause" ]

[ "holding that party standing in loco parentis has standing to seek custody of child", "holding that a grandmother who frequently babysat her granddaughter was not in loco parentis and thus lacked standing to seek custody of her granddaughter", "holding that prevailing party has no standing to appeal", "holding that grandmother in loco parentis of her three grandchildren had protected liberty interest in their future care and custody", "holding that domestic partner who assumed a parental status over her partners child and performed parental duties with the partners permission stood in loco parentis to the child and had standing to seek partial custody and visitation" ]

[ "holding that the filing of a motion for reconsideration does not toll the period for seeking judicial review of the underlying order", "holding for the same reason that motion for appointment of counsel does not toll the period for filing a federal habeas petition", "holding that an unauthorized motion for rehearing does not toll defendants time for filing a notice of appeal", "holding that time limit for filing petition for review is mandatory and jurisdictional", "holding filing of motion for reconsideration does not toll the 30day deadline for filing petition for review" ]

[ "holding that damage to building and personal property as a result of fire negligently caused by defendant was to be measured by reasonable cash market value of the property at the time it was destroyed by the fire or if it was not totally destroyed by the diminution in its fair market value before and after the fire", "holding that the land contract vendor was entitled to fire insurance benefits when the fire occurred after a judgment for possession was obtained by the vendor pursuant to summary forfeiture proceedings", "holding that petition failed to allege fire hydrants were physically defective where fire hydrants did not work and plaintiffs decedent was killed in fire", "holding that the relationship between fire insurance regulation and rating fire loss fire prevention and fire investigation is rational and reasonable", "holding where the defendants conduct in setting a fire was a proximate cause of a fire fighters death the death occurred in course of and in furtherance of the arson" ]

[ "holding the immigration judges denial of a continuance request did not constitute an abuse of discretion", "holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing plaintiffs expert witness to testify when it also allowed defendants expert witness who disputed the methodology used by plaintiffs expert to testify", "holding denial of continuance to be an abuse of discretion", "holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion by determining expert witness was qualified to testify", "holding that there was no abuse of discretion in allowing a defendants surprise fact witness to testify because the plaintiff did not request a continuance" ]

[ "holding that hearsay evidence is not acceptable in opposing a summary judgment motion", "holding that a grant of summary judgment in favor of one party creates a final judgment allowing appellate review of denial of opposing partys summary judgment motion", "holding that hearsay in affidavit which would be inadmissible in evidence at trial could not be considered on motion for summary judgment", "holding that a court may not consider hearsay contained in an affidavit when ruling on a summary judgment motion", "holding that hearsay ev idence is not acceptable in opposing a summary judgment motion" ]

[ "holding that the presentation of a new theory does not constitute the presentation of a new issue on which a jury trial should be granted as of right under rule 38b", "holding that there is no constitutional duty to do a better investigation and that a decision not to conduct a more thorough investigation does not invade an accuseds rights", "holding that the burden is on the plaintiff", "holding that the burden is upon the state under the applicable federal rules of evidence", "holding that brady does not place any burden upon the government to conduct a defendants investigation or assist in the presentation of the defenses case" ]

[ "holding 922g is not unconstitutional as applied to a defendant who possessed a firearm only intrastate when the government demonstrated that the firearm moved in interstate commerce", "recognizing scarborough holding that commerce nexus satisfied upon showing that possessed firearm had traveled at some time in interstate commerce", "holding that a defendant possessed a firearm in connection with a crime when the firearm was kept in a car across the street from where the defendant was selling drugs", "holding that the government was required to prove that the defendant lacked a license to possess a firearm but not that the defendant possessed the firearm for any duration of time", "holding that to apply the firearm enhancement the firearm need only reflect the context of the defendants possession and the defendants ability to use the firearm to promote the controlled substance offense" ]

[ "recognizing that delay in indictment may sometimes be a basis for a sentencing departure but holding that district court erred when it decreased sentence based on a delay in an indictment where the offenses were separate crimes distinct in time place and victims", "holding trial court erred in denying defendants motion for arrest of judgment where indictment was insufficient", "holding that district court erred in dismissing the indictment based on sufficiency of evidence", "recognizing that an indictment may be dismissed in part", "holding that an indictment gave sufficient notice when the indictment charged the elements of the offense" ]

[ "holding that the date on which the plaintiff learned of the defendants denial of tenure not the date on which the plaintiff became unemployed was when the statute of limitations began to run", "holding that the statute of limitations for an employment discrimination lawsuit by a college professor who did not receive tenure began when the college made the tenure decision and communicated that decision to the plaintiff", "holding that the only alleged discrimination occurred and the filing limitations periods therefore commenced at the time the adverse employment action was made and communicated to the plaintiff", "holding that the limitations period for a discrimination charge based on tenure denial begins when aggrieved person receives notice of denial not on the last day of employment", "holding that the statute teacher tenure act does not allow termination on the basis of a regulation which neither forbids nor commands action" ]

[ "holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting testimony to only one witness where additional witnesses would have provided the same testimony", "holding that the trial court must apply the provisions of the statute and specifically determine whether the perpetrator of domestic abuse had rebutted the presumption against an award of joint custody", "holding unconstitutional a state evidentiary rule automatically excluding alternative perpetrator evidence when the prosecution case was strong", "holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting alternative perpetrator evidence where the record demonstrated the supposed alternative perpetrator was near the victim no more than ten minutes before the crime", "holding that if the trial court would have had no discretion to deny summary judgment on an alternative ground the appellate court can on that alternative ground sustain the order granting summary judgment" ]

[ "holding district court abused its discretion in admitting state court findings of fact", "holding trial court abused its discretion in admitting rape victims 911 call because the emotional and nearly incoherent outpourings of the victim in the immediate aftermath of a violent crime necessarily induced a feeling of outrage against the defendant", "holding admissible testimony of the victims daughter regarding a telephone call from the defendant to the victim hours before the victims death and the victims emotions following the telephone call where defendant claimed accident", "holding the trial court had abused its discretion in admitting several photographs of a murder victims body", "holding that the issue was more appropriately framed as whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting the evidence at trial" ]

[ "holding that once a trial court makes an unequivocal ruling admitting evidence over a movants motion in limine the movants subsequent introduction of that evidence does not constitute a waiver of the error for appellate review", "holding grant or denial of motion in limine is preliminary ruling and normally preserves nothing for appellate review", "holding that a party failed to preserve error by not pursuing a ruling at trial where the courts motion in limine ruling invited the party to attempt to admit the evidence during trial", "holding that for error to be preserved on appeal with regard to admission of evidence in violation of a ruling on a motion in limine that the evidence is inadmissible an objection should be made at the time the evidence is offered", "holding that a definitive ruling in limine preserves an issue for appellate review without the need for later objection" ]

[ "holding that courts interpret indemnity provisions same as written contracts", "holding a state court has an inescapable obligation to interpret and apply the federal statute", "holding that trial courts have no obligation to conclusively and finally interpret claims when considering a preliminary injunction", "recognizing that the rules of statutory construction apply when we interpret constitutional provisions", "holding that insurance obligation was primary to indemnity obligation" ]

[ "holding that reasonable reliance upon the old rule is an important factor supporting prospective application of the new rule", "holding that the exclusionary rule does not apply to proceedings other than criminal trials", "holding a court may apply a new rule in the criminal case before it but return to the old rule as to all other cases arising on facts predating the pronouncement", "holding that a new rule for the conduct of criminal prosecutions is to be applied retroactively to all cases pending on direct review with no exception for cases in which the new rule constitutes a clear break with the past", "holding that when the supreme court applies a rule of federal law to the parties before it that rule is the controlling interpretation of federal law and must be given full retroactive effect in all cases still open on direct review and as to all events regardless of whether such events predate or postdate our announcement of the rule" ]

[ "holding rule 54b certification invalid because unaccompanied by any statement of reasons and factors underlying trial courts decision to grant certification", "holding that while it is not appropriate to consider the merits in determining certification the admissibility of all evidence which has relevance to the merits is not barred if it is relevant to the purpose of refuting or supporting the existence of a class", "holding that rule 54b certification order should contain specific findings setting forth reasons for certification", "holding that it was proper in determining certification to consider whether certification would foster the settlement of the case with advantage to the parties and with great savings in judicial time and services", "holding need certification filed after information returned was timely because the statute includes no deadline for filing a certification and no court has imposed one" ]

[ "holding that evidence of specific competitive injury establishes irreparable injury warranting injunctive relief", "holding that a court may issue injunctive relief only when the movant demonstrates four factors substantial likelihood of success on the merits irreparable harm no substantial injury to the other party and furtherance of the public interest", "holding that injunctive relief may be warranted where there is a particularly strong likelihood of success on the merits even if there is a relatively slight showing of irreparable injury", "holding that the movant had to establish both of the first two factors ie likelihood of success and irreparable harm to receive a preliminary injunction", "holding that even when likelihood of success has been established the absence of irreparable injury standing alone makes preliminary injunctive relief improper" ]

[ "holding that 1681ba3a applies only if the con sumer initiates a credit transaction", "holding that amtrak is an agency of the government for purposes of the constitutional obligations of government", "holding that the government agency was engaged in the collection of an account under 15 usc 1681ba3a and therefore had a permissible purpose for obtaining the credit report", "holding that it was not an abuse of discretion for the trial court to exclude an agency finding of no discrimination on the ground that the report would suggest to the jury that it should reach the same conclusion as the agency", "holding in the context of a fcra violation that a jury could find that a consumers credit score was negatively influenced by the failure to list a debt as disputed because evidence was presented that when a credit reporting agency received notice of a dispute it records the dispute in the credit report and does not include the derogatory information in assessing the credit score" ]

[ "holding that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity", "holding immunity from liability is not jurisdictional", "recognizing a claim for civil liability against municipalities under 1983", "holding individual officers entitlement to qualified immunity does not immunize municipalities from monell liability", "holding that qualified immunity is not merely immunity from damages but also immunity from suit" ]

[ "holding that the government interest in preventing crime is compelling", "holding on summary judgment that a regulation is narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest", "recognizing the compelling interest in highway safety", "holding that such classifications are permissible only when suitably tailored to serve a compelling state interest", "holding grandparent visitation statute serves compelling state interest in maintaining grandparentgrandchild relationship where grandparents had raised child for period of time but agreeing with trial court that something more than childs best interest must be established to serve compelling state interest" ]

[ "holding a state has a substantial interest in regulating the practice of law within the state", "recognizing the public interest exception", "holding pennsylvania statute regulating subrogation is a law regulating insurance", "recognizing a somewhat greater governmental interest in regulating expressive activity on city streets because of the public safety concerns raised by vehicular traffic", "recognizing governmental interest in rehabilitation" ]

[ "holding despite authority for the general proposition that the duty to defend is determined based on the allegations of the complaint that an insurer had no duty to defend where the underlying claim was covered by the policy based on the facts pleaded in complaint but other facts not appearing in the complaint excluded coverage", "holding that once a plaintiff has pled facts in the complaint indicating that the statute of limitations is a complete or partial bar to an action it is incumbent upon the plaintiff to plead either in the complaint or in amendments to it facts establishing an exception to the affirmative defense", "holding that the insurer had no duty to defend the insured because the allegations of the initial complaint did not allege facts which would bring the case within the coverage of the title insurance policy", "holding that when the insurer takes the position that the policy does not cover the complaint the insurer must 1 defend the suit under a reservation of rights or 2 seek a declaratory judgment that there is no coverage if the insurer fails to take either of these actions it will be estopped from later raising policy defenses to coverage", "holding that rather than mechanically applying only the four corners of the complaint rule the sounder approach is to require the insurer to provide a defense when it has actual knowledge of facts establishing a reasonable possibility of coverage" ]

[ "holding that inclusion of a general release was merely a suggestion of how to terminate the lawsuit and that acceptance was not qualified on use of the specific release and party was willing to discuss the terms of a release", "holding that where the capital defendants future dangerousness is at issue and state law prohibits the defendants release on parole due process requires that the sentencing jury be informed that the defendant is parole ineligible", "holding that federal prisoners claim was properly filed as an action for habeas although he was not laying claim to an immediate release or release in the near future he is however maintaining that he is being deprived of the chance to secure his release by unlawfully being declared ineligible for parole consideration", "holding that habeas petition challenging the state boards decision to defer his scheduled parole release date was rendered moot by prisoners release from custody on parole and subsequent incarceration for violating his parole", "holding that release discharges only persons named in or sufficiently described by terms of release" ]

[ "holding failure to follow progressive discipline policy does not constitute pretext when employer reserves right to fire atwill employees without notice", "holding that the statement in the employers progressive discipline policy that in situations where employee behavior warrants immediate termination the stages of this process do not need to be followed granted the employer unbounded discretion to discharge employees without following the guidelines", "holding no pretext for not following progressive discipline where policy contemplated immediate termination for certain offenses", "holding the employer breached the duty owed to its employee by erroneously advising the employee he would continue to have coverage for 30 days following his termination of employment under the employers group policy", "holding failure to follow progressive discipline does not demonstrate pretext when use of the policy is entirely discretionary" ]

[ "recognizing that the two statutes are nearly identical", "holding that trial judge is legally correct in dismissing declaratory action when two actions are substantially the same issues were identical and the identical action was still pending", "holding that though mississippi law governs the amount of the fee award here because the factors considered under state and federal law are nearly identical both state and federal cases are instructive", "holding these two statutes are not criminal offenses and only affect sentencing", "holding that substantive aspects of claims under federal discrimination statutes and fcra are identical" ]

[ "holding where party fails to challenge specificity of pleading it waives right to claim that pleading fails to meet legal requirements", "holding right to be fundamental", "holding that a defendant who fails to object to trial error forfeits his right to appellate review unless he can establish fundamental error", "holding that plain error review applies when a party fails to raise a claim before the district court", "holding that absent fundamental error one who fails to appeal when placed on probation waives his right to review" ]

[ "holding that universitys amendment of regulation made moot a challenge to regulations", "holding that a conviction for receiving stolen property based on possession must be vacated because it involved the same act constituting theft based on retaining property", "holding that courts must defer to executive branch regulations implementing statutes so long as agencys regulation is based on a permissible construction of the statute", "holding based on army regulations that club constituting nonappropriated fund instrumentality was under military regulation and control", "holding that the challenge to a university regulation was moot because the regulation had been substantially amended" ]

[ "recognizing that deference to an agencys interpretation of the written law is appropriate only when that interpretation is within the written laws language", "holding that when an agencys interpretation of its own rules flies in the face of the language of the rules themselves it is owed no deference", "holding that deference is owed to an agencys interpretation of its own categorical exclusion regulations so long as that interpretation is not plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation", "holding that deference is owed to state agencys interpretation of state law", "holding that an agencys interpretation of its own regulations is entitled to deference" ]

[ "recognizing that plaintiff can bring action under due process clause of state constitution", "holding that the due process clause protects only those liberty interests created by the state", "holding that a state agency created under state law was a state actor", "holding that whether children are legitimate for purposes of entitlement to insurance benefits is determined by state law", "holding that the federal due process clause protects a state employee who under state law has a legitimate claim of entitlement to state employment" ]

[ "holding that a plaintiff who did not show that he was paid at a lower rate than similarly situated employees could not survive summary judgment", "holding that potential class members are similarly situated to the named plaintiffs if they are similarly situated with respect to their job requirements and pay provisions", "holding that fourth element of a prima facie case is satisfied when the employees who were more favorably treated were situated similarly to the plaintiff", "holding that a similarly situated petitioner was perse cuted when he was repeatedly threatened with death and hunted down albeit unsuccessfully by men with pistols who were out to harm him", "holding that employee who violated a different policy of the store than plaintiff was not similarly situated" ]

[ "holding in pertinent part that this court lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal", "holding that the appellate court had jurisdiction to hear the interlocutory appeal on a restraining order and the district court retained jurisdiction to proceed with the trial", "holding that the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case because both the administrative and the judicial forfeiture actions were not commenced within the 120day timeframe", "holding the appellate court lacked jurisdiction to hear an appeal where the circuit court had the power to remand the agency decision for further proceedings", "holding that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case because it was filed without proper authority" ]

[ "holding that the waiver in two previous contracts was insufficient to support waiver of the contract at issue in that appeal", "holding that the word waiver is not required to waive a right even when a statute requires clear and unmistakable evidence of waiver", "holding that the constitutional protection against double jeopardy may be waived pursuant to a bargainedfor plea", "holding that a defendant and his attorney are a single entity with respect to double jeopardy waiver", "holding that when the court in menna suggested that a double jeopardy claim may be waived it is clear that the court was referring not to waiver conclusively presumed from a guilty plea but to waiver as defined in johnson v zerbst" ]

[ "recognizing money laundering as a predicate act under rico", "recognizing that deadly weapon finding may be made even when weapon used is unknown", "holding that venue did not he in virginia for money laundering that occurred in florida de spite the fact that the money was embezzled in virginia", "holding that defendants state conviction for carrying a concealed weapon was not part of the instant federal money laundering offense even though the concealed weapon was found at the time of defendants arrest for attempting to carry out money laundering scheme", "holding that rule 3702d12 does not apply to convictions for possession of firearm and carrying concealed weapon when unrelated to commission of any additional substantive offenses" ]

[ "holding the large quantity of drugs sufficient evidence of intent to distribute", "holding that there was sufficient evidence of intent to sell or deliver where the defendant was in possession of one large cocaine rock and eight smaller rocks", "holding there was insufficient evidence to prove intent to distribute where the defendant dropped a plastic bag containing loose white rocks of cocaine and there was no other indicia of the defendants intent such as the drugs being packaged in smaller baggies", "holding that defendants collective possession of plastic baggies beepers and scales in conjunction with other evasive action was sufficient evidence for jury to find conspiracy to distribute and possess cocaine beyond reasonable doubt", "holding no unfair prejudice from admission of conviction for possession of 50 to 200 pounds of marijuana with intent to distribute as evidence of intent to distribute cocaine" ]

[ "holding that harassment threats and one beating did not constitute persecution", "holding that two beatings which were four years apart lasted only a few hours each and did not result in serious injury did not constitute persecution", "holding that court was not compelled to find past persecution or a wellfounded fear of persecution where the petitioner was arrested detained for four hours and experienced some physical mistreatment", "holding that a chiropractor was not in custody for miranda purposes despite an ensuing interview which lasted nearly seven hours", "holding that two arrests and repeated beatings constituted persecution" ]

[ "holding that res judicata is not applicable to a claim for relief that was unavailable in the earlier action", "holding that res judicata does not bar those claims that arose after the original pleading is filed in the earlier proceeding", "holding that res judicata applies in deportation proceedings", "holding that res judicata did not preclude the subsequent filing of an action which was a permissive claim in a prior action", "holding that the doctrine of res judicata is applicable to defenses that could have been raised in a prior action" ]

[ "holding that the proper measure of compensation in a temporary taking is the rental value that probably could have been obtained", "holding that fair market value was proper measure of damages for stock brokers breach of margin agreement caused by sale of plaintiffs shares without authorization noting that generally speaking fair market value is proper measure of damages for breach of contract relating to sale of goods which have an ascertamable value on the market", "holding failure to raise issue of improper measure of damages in trial court waived review of complaints that proper measure of damages was not submitted to jury and that plaintiff failed to present evidence on the proper measure", "holding that the proper measure of damages to repair defects for a building contract that has not been substantially performed is the contractually agreed upon measure of damages", "holding that the proper measure of damages was the present value of all unaccrued payments that the plaintiff would have received if the contract had been performed" ]

[ "holding that selfinterested witnesses can be reliable when they provide detailed testimony that is corroborated by other witnesses or facts", "holding that material for witnesses need not be produced to defendant where the witnesses were not called as government witnesses at trial", "holding that the government had established necessity for wiretaps despite its use of three cooperating witnesses because those witnesses were able to give agents only limited information not including the names of all members of the conspiracy", "holding that the descriptions given by three witnesses were sufficiently accurate despite the fact that they varied in detail", "holding where the plaintiff presented evidence which demonstrates that the terms alleged by the defendants to be indefinite were in fact sufficiently well delineated to all parties the entry of judgment notwithstanding the verdict in favor of the defendants was inappropriate despite the fact that the defendants contested the plaintiffs evidence concerning the manner in which the relevant contractual language should be construed" ]

[ "holding that party who noted issue and made several broad conclusory statements on appeal waived argument for failure to develop", "holding that several coercive statements made in combination required reversal", "holding that a statement that the jurors were not required to reach a verdict but should try to do so was not coercive", "holding that allen charge given by court was coercive and required a new trial", "holding that failure to give explanation of allegations required reversal" ]

[ "holding that section 2621 does not apply to claims for breach of warranty", "holding that warranty claim accrued at tender where 180 day warranty on computer not a warranty for future performance as it involved a remedy only", "holding that fifra preempts breach of warranty claims based on labeling", "holding that passenger cannot maintain action for breach of implied warranty to provide safe passage", "holding plaintiff had to commence his breach of implied warranty action under the dtpa within two years because tjhis special statute of limitations denies plaintiffs alternative proposal of entitlement to recover for breach of the common law implied warranty" ]

[ "holding that legislature clearly intended that workers compensation act and unemployment security act be construed together thus prohibiting worker from receiving both unemployment compensation and workers compensation payments for same period", "holding that rule 6e did not extend the period in which a workers compensation carrier was required to pay a compensation award under the longshore and harbor workers compensation act where the act required payment within ten days of filing of the order as opposed to within ten days of service of notice provided for in the rule", "holding that the trial courts authority to initiate workers compensation benefits before the final adjudication was not divested by the legislature and was consistent with the stated purpose of the workers compensation act", "holding that the longshore and harbor workers compensation act specifically relates to business of insurance", "holding that an injured workers initial election to seek state compensation does not implicate the exclusivity provision to preclude the worker from later seeking compensation under the longshore act" ]

[ "holding that simply because claimants had diverted the entire run of the water at issue did not give them the ability to claim a right to all the water when they could not and had not put it to beneficial use", "holding that until the state issues a certificate of appropriation any right to use the water remains inchoate", "holding that a water right is a property right created by a person appropriating unappropriated water and applying it to a beneficial use", "holding that the legislative assembly intended the water right certificate not the permit even when followed by a beneficial use to mark the point at which a water right becomes vested", "recognizing the right to use water to generate power" ]

[ "holding that filing of petition for writ of certiorari did not prevent judgment from becoming final for purposes of limitations period of missouri savings statute which provided that plaintiff who suffers nonsuit in wrongful death action may commence new action within one year thereafter", "holding new mexico statute of limitations for filing a 1983 action is three years", "holding it is settled that the supreme court may consider questions raised on the first appeal after which the court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari as well as those that were before the court of appeals upon the second appeal after which the court granted a petition for a writ of certiorari internal quotation marks omitted", "recognizing the right to petition for writ of certiorari as a form of appellate review", "holding that the oneyear period begins to run after the time for filing a petition for a writ of certiorari has expired" ]

[ "holding that provisions in a subcontract incorporating a prime contract for a limited purpose are limited only to those that are applicable", "holding that the tort threshold requirement njsa 39670n is not applicable if the injury to a qualified claimant is caused by a hit and run motorist", "holding a sentence is not limited to period of incarceration", "holding limited by njsa 2a1557", "holding a writ was appropriate when the authorization was not limited as to time and not limited to specific healthcare providers" ]

[ "holding the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to allow a question to prospective jurors on their feelings against recommending probation as punishment in a murder case", "holding the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to allow a question seeking to determine bias or prejudice in favor of the victim because she was a nun", "holding trial judge was at the very limit of his discretion in refusing to remove prospective jurors for cause", "holding trial court abused its discretion by refusing to allow questions regarding victims status as a child", "holding trial court abused its discretion by refusing to conduct hearing and render decision on motion" ]

[ "holding that an agreement may provide elements of a plan by setting out rules under which beneficiaries will be entitled to care", "holding that nonsignatory settlor and trust beneficiaries could be compelled to arbitrate under account agreement between trustee and merrill lynch which contained an arbitration clause because agreement was the underlying basis for all the claims of the beneficiaries and there would have been no claims without the agreement", "holding that the proceeds of a pension plan could be garnished after they had been paid out to the beneficiaries", "holding that beneficiaries of an alleged will may recover reasonable expenses and attorneys fees when defending a will in good faith", "recognizing that there may be multiple beneficiaries of federal programs" ]

[ "holding that order denying confirmation of plan became final when upon being notified that the debtors did not intend to seek confirmation of an alternate plan the court dismissed their case", "holding such agreements to be per se illegal", "holding that per se statutory rule is not permissible under fourth amendment", "holding hearing in chambers was not per se a violation of due process", "holding that a plan proponents failure to obtain court approval of solicitation materials is not per se fatal to the confirmation process" ]

[ "holding that despite failure to appear for trial default could not be entered without notice to defendant", "holding that trial court must make entry of default prior to entry of default judgment and court may not make entry of default when there is no default in law or in fact", "holding that default judgment was not warranted where the defendant answered late but answered", "holding that the trial court was without authority to set aside entry of default on motion to set aside default judgment", "holding 1 that where a defendant who previously answered does not appear for trial a plaintiffs only remedy is to make a motion with the court to continue with that trial 2 that entry of default is not authorized and 3 that the hearing held under such circumstances is uncontested as distinguished from a default hearing 1 quoting warden v lamb 98 calapp 738 277 p 867 868 1929" ]

[ "holding that the florida offense of attempted lewd assault on a child under the age of sixteen is a crime of violence even though the offense might be accomplished without use of physical force", "holding that the trial judge erred in instructing the jury on the physical endangerment portion of the statute when the defendant was charged only with the risk of injury to a child by doing an act likely to impair the morals of a child under the age of sixteen", "holding that where defendant charged with wilfully or unlawfully committing certain acts likely to impair the morals of a minor child contrary to general statutes 5321 specific intent is not an element of the crime defined", "holding that the deliberate touching of the private parts of a child under the age of sixteen in a sexual and indecent manner was conduct proscribed by the second prong of subsection 1", "holding an unborn child is a child for purposes of prosecuting chemical endangerment of a child" ]

[ "holding that attorneys claim for professional services against person sui juris or against property of such person must rest upon contract of employment express or implied made with person sought to be charged or with his agent", "holding a person who has availed himself of part of single claim or obligation in action or defense is thereafter estopped from enforcing the remainder of it", "holding that a motion to intervene is not dispositive of a claim or defense of a party", "holding that in class action the claim or defense of the representative party must be typical of the claim or defense of each member of the class", "holding that the rule of splitting of causes of action as related to res judicata does not permit the owner of a single or entire cause of action or an entire indivisible demand to divide or split that cause of action and that all damages from a single wrongful act must be claimed in one action" ]

[ "holding that appellant failed to preserve error in court reporters failure to make record of hearing by failing to object", "holding that a defendant waived a sentencing issue by failing to object in district court", "holding appellant waived argument by failing to assert it at suppression hearing", "holding that appellant by failing to object to commissioners authority before or at the administrative hearing waived any challenge", "holding appellant waived his challenge to statute as vague as applied because he did not specifically object at trial" ]

[ "holding that seller was entitled to recover contract price of goods where buyer failed to make effective rejection under the ucc", "holding merely that to the extent a breaching party claims that the appropriate measure of damages is the difference between the contract price and the market price it holds the burden of proving that there is in fact an available market for the goods in issue", "holding that where buyer had opportunity to inspect goods and failed to inform seller in timely manner of defects buyer deemed to have accepted goods pursuant to 672606", "holding that title revested in seller under california law when buyer revoked his acceptance of goods", "holding merely that to the extent a breaching buyer wishes to invoke the presumption that a nonbreaching seller will resell the contractedfor goods in the open market it holds the burden of proving that there is in fact an available market for those goods" ]

[ "holding that the act is retroactive", "holding retroactive application", "holding that retroactive aspects of legislation must satisfy due process a burden met simply by showing that the retroactive application of the legislation is itself justified by a rational legislative purpose", "holding no retroactive application", "recognizing a presumption against retroactive legislation" ]