Documents

Amicus Curiae Brief — Joseph R. Biden, Jr., President of the United States, et al., Petitioners v. Sierra Club, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Sep 8, 2020

These powers existed before the formation of the union and during the colonial period were possessed by and under the control of the Crown. … Chicago & Southern Air Lines, Inc. v. Waterman S.S. Corp., 333 U.S. 103, 111 (1948). Courts therefore should be 3 NSPD-25 appears to be classified and unavailable.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Stephen Russo, Interim Secretary, Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals, Petitioner v. June Medical Services L.L.C., et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Jun 24, 2019

See, e.g., id. at 410 (claiming that if Act 825 goes into effect, it will “eliminate abortions in Louisiana”); La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 9:2800.12 (Act 825 currently in effect). … Whitmore’s professional competency,” and placed his medical license on immediate probation for an indefinite period.99 Dr. Victor Brown. Dr.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Law Offices of Adam Zolonz, APC, et al., Petitioners v. Christina Ramirez

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Mar 30, 2026

The unrelated claims in this case found exempt from arbitration as “related’ to sexual harassment include: (1) Failure to provide adequate meal periods; (2) Failure to provide adequate rest periods; (3 … And unlike ordinary court filings, arbitration proceedings are usually confidential which protects both employers and employees from having to publicly air their grievances.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2002

Linde Air Products Co., 339 U.S. C05 CIGGR) 2 nc cccscvsseueeseeee 25 & n.47 Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Co. v. Walker, sy DS ST). 25 n.47 Machine Co. v. … Under the prior patent regime, the inventor assumes these risks in the hop= of obtaining monopoly profits for the period of any resulting pa- tent.

Amicus Curiae Brief — US Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall Partnership

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1994

Under the Act, a plan could be confirmed only if it was “fair and equitable” to each dissenting creditor. See Bankruptcy Act of 1898, Ch. … Commentators note that no reported decision adopted the Los Angeles Lumber dicta as holding prior to the Code’s adoption in 1978.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Landgraf v. USI Film Products

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1994

Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum, No. 91 Civ. 4439, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9424 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) Se idnckbeckucduedivdduscdedadtidésesse 12 Statutes Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub. L. … Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum, No. 91 Civ. 4439, 1992 U.S. Dist.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Lonberg v. City of Riverside

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2010

City of Riverside, 571 F.3d 846 (9th (air. Z0O0%) passim Skaff v. City of Corte Madera, Case No. 4:08-ey 05407 SBA (N.D. Cal.) 20. 23 Southwestern Comty. College v. … Although there is no required public-comment period, entitie are strong ly encouraged to consult with individuals wath di boadatue and organizations that represent them to the sell-evaluation proce

Amicus Curiae Brief — Louis Ciminelli, Petitioner v. United States, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Sep 6, 2022

.19 Official federal government policies note that the information gathering and exchange during the presolicitation context is different from concerns that might be raised during the post-solicitation period … This “restricted period” commences as of the “earliest posting . . . of written notice, advertisement or solicitation of a request for proposal, invitation for bids, or solicitation of proposals, or any

Amicus Curiae Brief — United States, et al., ex rel. Tracy Schutte, et al., Petitioners v. SuperValu Inc., et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Feb 24, 2023

A defendant acts knowingly if it “(i) has actual knowledge of the information; (ii) acts in deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the information; or (iii) acts in reckless disregard of the truth … (cleaned up); see also Halo Elecs., Inc. v.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Washington v. WASHINGTON EDUCATION ASSN.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2006

Habluetzel, 456 U.S. 91 (1982) (unreasonably short statute of limitations period violated due process); ? “Dues” are paid by union members. … Air Line Pilots Ass'n, 938 F.2d 1123, 1132-33 (10th Cir. 1991); Gibson v. The Florida Bar, 906 F.2d 624, 631 - (11th Cir. 1990); Crawford v.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Loper Bright Enterprises, et al., Petitioners v. Gina Raimondo, Secretary of Commerce, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Jul 24, 2023

The Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) governs federal fisheries outside the territory of any State. See 16 U.S.C. § 1801 et seq. … In that context and given the EPA’s role in implementing the Clean Air Act, few would reasonably argue that some level of deference to the 31 EPA’s technical expertise would be warranted.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Anoka Hennepin Education Minnesota, (American Federation of Teachers Local 7007), Petitioner v. Don Huizenga, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Mar 2, 2026

Richardson, 418 U.S. 166, 175, 179 (1974) (rejecting taxpayer standing to air “generalized grievances”). … This case presents a clean vehicle to repudiate municipal taxpayer standing.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1997

Linde Air Prods. Co., 339 U.S. 605 (1950) ; Schriber-Schroth Co. v. Cleveland Trust Co., 311 U.S. 211 (1940); Keystone Driller Co. vy. … Linde Air Prods.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Terry Pitchford, Petitioner v. Burl Cain, Commissioner, Mississippi Department of Corrections, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Mar 6, 2026

V (Due Process Clause) ....................... 1 Act of Jan. 31, 1928, ch. 14, 45 Stat. 54 ................................ 21 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. … There is one[,] period. [DEFENSE COUNSEL #1]: Right. Thank you. J.A. 175-176. Petitioner’s counsel again made no mention of comparable white jurors who were not struck. J.A. 176.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Snyder v. Louisiana

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2008

Although he made no more comments to the media, what he did was worse: He addressed similar, but even more objectionable comments directly to Mr. Snyder’s jury. … This case provides further evidenée for the existence of race-based recalci- trance, as well as a clean vehicle for addressing that recalcitrance.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Illinois v. Caballes

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 2005

Gillette noticed an atlas on the front seat, an open ashtray, the smell of air freshener, and a pair of suits hanging in the back without any other luggage. … That is well within the reason- able time period for a routine traffic stop.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Acheson Hotels, LLC, Petitioner v. Deborah Laufer

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Dec 8, 2022

“Congress might, for example, provide that everyone has an individual right to clean 8 air and can sue any defendant who violates any airpollution law.” TransUnion, 141 S. Ct. at 2206 & n.2. … May Wait For Justices To Act On ADA Hotels Case, Law360 (Nov. 22, 2022), tinyurl.com/2h3bvbx7. 2. Laufer is just one of many serial ADA litigants.

Amicus Curiae Brief — Project Veritas, et al., Petitioners v. Nathan Vasquez, in His Official Capacity as Multnomah County District Attorney, et al.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · May 22, 2025

nearly 10 years, a home raid, and years of litigation, Daleiden ultimately entered a no-contest plea agreement to a single count in January 2025 to dismiss the case, agreeing to a one-year diversionary period … (cleaned up).

Amicus Curiae Brief — Murphy v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · 1999

United Air Lines, Inc., 130 F.3d 893, 902 (1997), cert. granted, No. 97-1943 (Jan. 8, 1999), that the “substantial | Cf. 29 C. F. … Accordingly, the Senate Committee’s comment that the “regarded as” prong “ensure[{s]” protection of an individual with “controlled diabetes or epilepsy” under the Act is not inconsistent with the clear

Amicus Curiae Brief — United States, Petitioner v. Microsoft Corporation

Supreme Court brief · Amicus Curiae Brief · Jan 18, 2018

See Data Protection (Amendment) Act 2003 § 2(b) (Act No. 6/2003) (Ir.) … See, e.g., Balabel v Air India [1988] Ch. 317 (EWCA); McMullen v Kennedy [2007] IEHC 263.