Search the opinions of the US Circuit Courts of Appeal

Your query remedy returned 14289 results.

Your search has returned a large number of results. You might want to consider using additional terms to narrow it.

	OPINION/ORDER
	OPINION/ORDER I. BACKGROUND The background of this case is thoroughly discussed in the findings of fact of the district court. CFE's basic complaint is that MHSAA discriminates against female high school athletes by scheduling girls' sports to play in disadvantageous. Our task is now to reevaluate this claim in light of the Supreme Court's GVR. CFE responds by contending that Rancho Palos Verdes does not apply to the present case and that CFE is therefore entitled to prevail under both Title IX and § 1983. Standard of review Constitutional and statutory interpretation questions are issues of law. Or recent developments that we have reason to believe the court below did not fully consider. A GVR order is . . . potentially appropriate. 167 (1996) (holding that a GVR is
	OPINION/ORDER 1 have taken this interlocutory appeal from the district court's order denying their motions for class certification and preliminary injunction. The other seventeen property owners are George Cashin. The other appellees are the Glynn County Board of Equalization. The Glynn County Board of Education and City Commission of the City of Brunswick have not joined in the cross appeal. 2 2 1 * jurisdiction over this lawsuit. I. The essential background and procedural facts are these. This lawsuit arises out of a grievance they have with the way Glynn County assessed their ad valorem property taxes in the year 2000. Glynn County's system for assessing property taxes and adjudicating assessment disputes is complex. Which is responsible for assessing the county's property taxes. At which point the Board must notify any taxpayers whose assessments have been changed within five days. See O.C.G.A. § 48 5 302. 3 A taxpayer who is dissatisfied with the Board's reassessment of his property may appeal through the process set forth in O.C.G.A. § 48 5 311.
	OPINION/ORDER We hold that plaintiffs' possessory land claim is subject to the defense of laches and conclude that the claim must be barred on that basis. Circuit Judge: We are here confronted by land claims of historic vintage the wrongs alleged occurred over two hundred years ago. This action is itself twenty five years old which we must adjudicate against a legal backdrop that has evolved since the District Court's rulings. Determined (1) that treaties between the Cayuga Nation and the State of New York in 1795 and 1807 were not properly ratified by the federal government and were thus invalid under the Nonintercourse Act. That plaintiffs were entitled to about $211 million in prejudgment interest. We conclude that the possessory land claim alleged here is the type of claim to which a laches defense can be applied. We further conclude that plaintiffs' claim is barred by laches. The Cayuga Nation owned and occupied approximately three million acres of land in what is now New York State. Successive versions of the Act have been continuously in force from that time to the present day.
	OPINION/ORDER We hold that plaintiffs' possessory land claim is subject to the defense of laches and conclude that the claim must be barred on that basis. Circuit Judge: We are here confronted by land claims of historic vintage the wrongs alleged occurred over two hundred years ago. This action is itself twenty five years old which we must adjudicate against a legal backdrop that has evolved since the District Court's rulings. Determined (1) that treaties between the Cayuga Nation and the State of New York in 1795 and 1807 were not properly ratified by the federal government and were thus invalid under the Nonintercourse Act. That plaintiffs were entitled to about $211 million in prejudgment interest. We conclude that the possessory land claim alleged here is the type of claim to which a laches defense can be applied. We further conclude that plaintiffs' claim is barred by laches. Historical Background Plaintiffs allege that from time immemorial until the late eighteenth century the Cayuga Nation owned and occupied approximately three million acres of land in what is now New York State.
	OPINION/ORDER It is an authority constrained by no less a power than that of the People themselves. The constitution is written.
	OPINION/ORDER The fruit of these negotiations was the Revised Desegregation and Education Plan (Revised Plan). It was agreed that if LRSD substantially complied with the terms of the Revised Plan. If this assessment reveals that a program has not and likely will not improve African American achievement. LRSD shall take appropriate action in the form of either modifying how the program is implemented or replacing the program. Following what it believed was its substantial compliance with section 2.7.1 and the 2002 Remedy. It is from this judgment that LRSD now appeals. 4 II. The constitutional requirements for unitary status are set forth in Green v. The impetus for section 2.7 is colloquially referred to as the
	OPINION/ORDER The CPA was set to expire on December 31. Neither party shall have any liability for damages to or lost profits of the other.
	OPINION/ORDER 2006 after the case was initially argued and continues to participate in the matter pursuant to I.O.P 9.6.4. Regarding the availability of § 1983 to redress violations of federal statutory rights and the opinions of our sister courts of appeals that have questioned Matula. Held that the alleged violations of plaintiff's rights were actionable under § 1983 and denied defendants' motion for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. Concluding that plaintiff's cause of action could be maintained and there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find that defendants violated clearly established federal law. We will reverse. Wherein we specifically reasoned that § 1983 was available to redress a violation of a student's rights secured by the IDEA. The District Court also rejected defendants' argument that individuals could not be sued under § 1983 for alleged violations of the IDEA and Section 504 because these statutes impose liability only on entities that The procedure leading to the amendment of A.W.'s original complaint was as follows: the NJDOE defendants.
	OPINION/ORDER With him on the briefs were Robert F. Brink mann were on the brief for amici curiae Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America. On the brief were Peter D. The only circuit then to have considered
	OPINION/ORDER When a dispute arose as to whether Serralles was entitled to damages for breach of the agreement. Seeking a determination that Serralles is limited under the agreement to the exclusive remedy of repair. Contends that it is entitled to the full array of remedies provided by the South Carolina Uniform Commercial Code (the
	OPINION/ORDER Alleging that Triangle was negligent and/or breached an express or implied warranty when it recommended and sold Players a certain maritime sealant for the insulation covering the air conditioning ducts on its casino vessel. Players also sought a declaratory judgment that Triangle was liable for the economic damages 2 No. 01 3860 allegedly resulting from this negligence and/or breach of warranty. The ductwork was completely encased by the insulation and was therefore not visible to Holder.
	03-5124 -- MILLSAP V. MCDONNELL DOUGLAS CORP. -- 05/21/2004 Any other damages based upon backpay) are available as
	SCLC V. SESSIONS This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 >