Documents

Oral argument — Sprint Telephony v. Cnty of San Diego

Oral argument · Oral argument · Oct 26, 2006

But you might be all right if it said no State may prohibit by franchise or by license, period. But it says prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting. … All in the same act, passed at the same time. That is just not credible. Congress knew that you don't pull these decisions out of thin air.

Oral argument — Cigar Association of America Inc v. City of Phila

Oral argument · Oral argument · Jun 23, 2021

He said it three times in the course of his comments on the matter. He said that the preemptive scope is, quote, the areas that are specifically addressed by the bill. He said that three times. … I don't think the court can just discern out of the air that substantial economic harm is at issue. That's what plaintiffs have to prove.

Oral argument — National Labor Relations Board v. Grill Concepts Services, Inc. dba Daily Grill

Oral argument · Oral argument · Feb 6, 2024

The record is just a passing comment, a hearsay comment by somebody on the union side who says, everybody but you negotiated. What does that mean? … and isn't necessarily taking its responsibilities under the Act seriously.

Oral argument — etal_Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Secretary Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Oral argument · Oral argument · Sep 13, 2024

The NVRA, according to this court in that case, the purpose is to act as a shield to protect the right to vote, not to act as a sword to pierce it. … This is discussing the 90-day quiet period before an election where systematic voter removals are prohibited.

Oral argument — Penner v. Chase Bank USA NA

Oral argument · Oral argument · Feb 4, 2009

Comment three is directly applicable, and section 226.9c1 says very simply, if a periodic rate is increased because of the consumer's delinquency or default, written notice of the increase shall be given … They sought public comment. They studied it. They issued proposed rules to address it, which they've now adopted.

Oral argument — Black v. Henderson

Oral argument · Oral argument · Feb 10, 2004

No, because the acts were continuing in nature, and under the Morgan case, the U.S. … I'm referring to the period 91 to 97.

Oral argument — STANLEY v. CARR-GOTTSTEIN PROP

Oral argument · Oral argument · Jul 7, 2004

Such an act would be simply futile on the Stanley's part to try to replant their property to gain legal access to Lot 2. … I had one comment. I have to make a brief comment. Thank you. My brief comment is regarding the intended beneficiaries of the Stanleys.

Oral argument — Music Choice v. CRB

Oral argument · Oral argument · Nov 5, 2025

First, the judges publish the settlement terms, and there's a period where people can... Interested parties can comment, okay? … When they have the notice and comment period, do you typically not get comments from individual copyright holders? They just trust SoundExchange to handle that? For settlements?

Oral argument — Martin v. Wilkie

Oral argument · Oral argument · Apr 30, 2018

And everybody else whose claims were already pending is suggesting that Congress should have stepped in and said, okay, you have to devote all your resources to cleaning up your backlog. … The rant letter you offered him gives him nothing that would expedite his BVA decision from the period of time when it has been certified to the period of time when there will be a decision.

Oral argument — United States v. Waldemar Lorenzana-Lima

Oral argument · Oral argument · Feb 25, 2021

And the court's comments at the time, respectfully, raise that issue. … I'm not sure which the court was referring to on the air. So that could be that's really part of the confusion and ambiguity.

Oral argument — MidAmerica Bank v. Charter One Bank

Oral argument · Oral argument · Jan 22, 2009

What Mid-America fails to address are the changes implemented by Public Act 87-582. There were two acts that amended the UCC, 87-1135 and 87-582. … So I think the confusion is that we need to look at both public acts that amended 412 and we need to look in particular at Public Act 87-582, not just Public Act 87-1135, which I think is the source of

Oral argument — Robert Moiser v. Stonefield Josephson, Inc.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Oct 23, 2015

If I could address first the comments. Talk about restitution. And related to that, the comments about when Mr. Mosher said this fraud was first happening. Mr. … I think in our— Or did you just come in there and throw stuff up in the air?

Oral argument — Council Treev.USA

Oral argument · Oral argument · Apr 19, 2010

It's a very important case for the Administrative Procedure Act and for Section 309J of the Communications Act. … period.

Oral argument — RIESGO v. EDWARD D. SULTAN CO.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Nov 17, 2005

Did they act immediately or they acted like a few weeks later? They began to plan after September 11 of what to do, and then they phased these things in. And with Mr. … And the other are the various comments that were made over a period of time. So perhaps you can comment on the second. On the comments? Yes. I'd be happy to do that.

Oral argument — Frederick Grede v. FCStone LLC

Oral argument · Oral argument · Jun 7, 2017

I think what he was saying, as I read his comments based on the briefing and the rest, is he was saying the parties were briefing Paragraph 3 of that order as they did in the first appeal. … There were parties that failed as a result of the fact that all of the available assets were cleaned out for the seg ones right before the bankruptcy, and the trustee had to work through litigation and

Oral argument — FTC v. QYK Brands LLC

Oral argument · Oral argument · Mar 6, 2023

I may refer to some comments that occurred on March 6. … Well, and they might not even know is it clean, is it pure. I mean, if you got it back on a refund, if they're going to reuse that, that's all the more reason not to do business with your client.

Oral argument — Nelson v. Artley

Oral argument · Oral argument · May 21, 2015

It would be kind of a useless act or, as we always say, meaningless or pleasant. … Again, here in our case it's $100,000 because they're clean. So it's just apples and oranges with all due respect to the 1st District.

Oral argument — Ventana Wilderness v. Bradford

Oral argument · Oral argument · Feb 13, 2009

Was there during the period of time that the retired couple owned it? There is a dispute of fact whether there was grazing during the period when the Zitterbarts owned the lands. … And when the Forest Service went through the public comment period to prepare its EA, ultimately in 2005, my clients raised the issue that authorizing grazing on those lands would conflict with the public's

Oral argument — Dianne Khan v. United States

Oral argument · Oral argument · Nov 18, 2015

Khan has satisfied the six-month limitation period contained in Section 2401B. Turning to the two-year limitation period of 2401B, Ms. … It's just a complaint about a government agent acting badly.

Oral argument — Louisiana Public Service Comm v. FERC NOTE: Due to technical difficulties, there is a short 3 minute gap in the middle of the audio.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Feb 2, 2018

Normally, that doesn't just spring out of the air. And even if it does, it's initiated by the commission, it would be noticed. … It didn't occur simply because of the long period of time that occurred here. It happened within a very short window of time. Do you know when? I think it was in the late 2000 time period.