Documents

Oral argument — Stewart v. Gruber

Oral argument · Oral argument · Oct 4, 2023

They acted like the scheduling order deadlines did not exist, did not apply to them. … And then it was amended and amended and amended, all within the discovery period.

Oral argument — Wolford v. Lopez

Oral argument · Oral argument · Jan 20, 2026

The overall package of laws passed by Act 52 bans, presumptively bans, carry on 96.4 percent. … The Act of June 22, 1868 admitted Louisiana as a state. That was the Radical Reconstruction Congress.

Oral argument — Illinois Casualty Co. v. Wellington Homes, Inc.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Oct 7, 2015

The acts or omissions are missing. … Isn't it disingenuous to suggest that this comment about a claim being potentially within the policy is a holding when it's really we were setting out what the facts of the case were?

Oral argument — John Stephenson v. Ron Neal

Oral argument · Oral argument · Jun 27, 2017

And I think that's important, because I think that he's not making up things out of thin air. He's not telling a totally different series of events. … I'm talking about the period of this trial. OK, during the period of this trial, it was from the record that this was a new restraint used by the security.

Oral argument — United States v. Ricky Fackrell

Oral argument · Oral argument · Nov 2, 2020

And the Supreme Court in Boyd found nothing objectionable with those comments. … But the defense in a car certainly did object to the prosecutor's comments, and that did not occur here.

Oral argument — Peter Trauernicht v. Genworth Financial Inc.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Oct 21, 2025

And that's the court's responsibility in issuing that judgment, not the fiduciary's responsibility to come up behind the court and clean up whatever the court does. … But the fiduciary act that we're describing here is the choice of the menu. And Mr. Wormers, in his report, says the choice of the target date series is a single choice.

Oral argument — Lexington Insurance Company v. Precision Drilling Company

Oral argument · Oral argument · Sep 13, 2019

And the first problem is that what the district court's decision does is create coverage out of thin air. … upstream, its subsidiaries, affiliated and related companies, their working interest owners, co-lessees, co-owners, contractors and subcontractors, and any others for whom any of the foregoing may be acting

Oral argument — DSPT International v. Nahum

Oral argument · Oral argument · May 6, 2009

It was simply an explanation to them of how they could make the calculation based on what they believed was the relevant time period. … He doesn't like the result, but as to each and every one of the factors under the Anti-Cyberspotting Act, there was evidence in the record to support what the jury found. Thank you.

Oral argument — Mike Yoder v. Scott Bowen

Oral argument · Oral argument · Jan 29, 2025

Because these drones fly 400 feet in the air, they're not what you would normally see in hunting grounds a DNR official could easily see what was going on there and approach the person that was using that … It's the act of enhancing your senses. So the same way, Your Honor, where if you were flying in an airplane above the area with binoculars, that's an unfair advantage over these deer.

Oral argument — United States v. Cortez

Oral argument · Oral argument · May 5, 2020

Well, first of all, the district court using the wrong standard is was plain air in terms of his factual analysis because the district court, the standard used was in the light, most favorable. … I really appreciate your professionalism and the way you handled this type of argument, the world we live in for the next period of time.

Oral argument — Consumers Research v. FCC

Oral argument · Oral argument · Mar 17, 2023

And did you file a comment in that 14-day period? We did, Your Honor. It is a 14-day period. It's short. Yeah, and what did the comment do? … So your opponent mentioned the 14-day period for people such as themselves to make comments. How long does the FCC have to evaluate what USAC has done?

Oral argument — Alejandro Ordonez v. United States

Oral argument · Oral argument · Apr 13, 2012

And then I look at the Federal Tort Claims Act, which looks pretty good. … Davis, and look at the situation in the Second Circuit and the Adeliki case, and comment on that and how that was resolved subsequent to a case not unlike Martinson.

Oral argument — Callinan v. Shevick Sales Corp.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Jun 12, 2024

There's three different time periods or two different time periods of issue here. … Tech Air, and Converge v. Topey.

Oral argument — United States v. Michael Clemans

Oral argument · Oral argument · Feb 4, 2020

If she agrees, I'm going to clean up his language to sex during my next visit. I want to have a photo session with us together having sex for my collection. … Well, there were both – there were both his acts and his statements. First, his acts. He moved to Thailand.

Oral argument — Housing Authority v. Mueller

Oral argument · Oral argument · Aug 23, 2017

Now, I'd just like to touch on also the idea that you're commenting on assembly space. What is assembly space? … Could you respond to the comments about Appendix F? Sure, I'd be happy to.

Oral argument — In re S.P.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Dec 6, 2017

s private part, performed an act of oral sex on K.B., and performed an act of anal sex. And then at some point during this discussion, that changed. There wasn't an act of anal sex. … He said at the fairgrounds, by where the animals are, that O.M. had touched him, performed an act of oral sex, and performed an act of anal sex.

Oral argument — Harward v. City of Austin

Oral argument · Oral argument · Aug 8, 2023

So, you're saying annexation period is synonymous with tax, no matter who challenges an annexation and it's a tax case? … But what if you have a case that it's about annexation, period? I mean, that's what this case is about.

Oral argument — Service Employees International Union v. ILRB, Local Panel

Oral argument · Oral argument · May 16, 2017

It makes sense that the General Assembly did not pull this very peculiar phrase out of thin air. It pulled it from Nacolni. And therefore, it should be interpreted in accordance with Nacolni. … It used it in other provisions, other sections of the Act.

Oral argument — Weichsel v. JP Morgan

Oral argument · Oral argument · Mar 8, 2023

That's all in Comment 9E2. In addition, it can be provided on and combined with a periodic statement. That's both the regulation, 1026.9E2, and Comment 9 – this gets really confusing here. … There is a Comment 9E with numbers after it. There is also a Comment 9E in parentheses, 2 in parentheses, and then numbers after it. So I'm referring to Comment 9E2-1 and 2.

Oral argument — United States v. Seun Ojedokun

Oral argument · Oral argument · Sep 23, 2021

It was not raised in the court below, argued in his plain air. I'm alternatively arguing as an effective assistance of counsel claim. … That requires an overt act. If that would have been true. That's right. An overt act is pretty simple. It could be most anything. It's a criminal act, my friend. An overt act.