Documents

Oral argument — Spartan Concrete v. Argos USVI

Oral argument · Oral argument · Dec 11, 2018

Did your client have clean hands in that arraignment? … And that's just on the Section 2A side of Robinson-Patman Act. In addition to prove damages under Clayton Act Section 4, they have to prove antitrust injury and a reliable measure of damages.

Oral argument — Saunders Group v. Comfortrac

Oral argument · Oral argument · May 11, 2007

Period. Full stop. That's the first sentence of the summary. … For example, Loveless, that is a unique double-acting cylinder, and it's a patent that claims a novel use of an O-ring seal and a double-acting cylinder.

Oral argument — Miyagi v. Dean Transportation, Inc

Oral argument · Oral argument · May 16, 2019

So there was a four-year period of time. Yes. During that four-year period of time, the plaintiff sustained $300,000 in medical expense. Is that correct? That's correct. … I don't know where they get this number, but let's just not act. It's probably $500 a week or a month.

Oral argument — Markley v. U.S. Bank

Oral argument · Oral argument · Nov 18, 2022

They did not do anything beyond look at the report and decide whether to act. Is that correct? That is what they had, Your Honor. Okay. All right. … Pretext doesn't exist in the air. It's not pretext plus to say pretext for age discrimination. It's simply pretext. What if Mr.

Oral argument — United States v. Leroy Combs

Oral argument · Oral argument · Nov 16, 2017

He acted extraordinarily calm. He responded to the situation. He dismissed the jurors. And it was a very short period of time in terms of it being written out. It was three or four paragraphs. … That is to say, if I knowingly submit a false return, I'm not acting in good faith. But if I am acting in good faith, that's a defense.

Oral argument — Tara Sadler v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insuran

Oral argument · Oral argument · Oct 15, 2009

What was the period of delay? I remember seeing somewhere it was 36 days. All of this panned out within 36 days. Am I misrecollecting, or is that correct? All right. … It's like if you're hurt and you can't clean your house, then you can get these services. Or if you're hurt and you can't work, then you get some wage loss.

Oral argument — Lisa Johnson v. Amazon.com Services LLC

Oral argument · Oral argument · Sep 25, 2024

It required employees to show that there was a willfulness component to get a third year in the limitations period. … Air Method Control does a very nice job of evaluating and distinguishing how the Illinois hours worked compensability regulation is broader than what's in federal law.

Oral argument — United States v. Enil Montoya Velasquez

Oral argument · Oral argument · Sep 16, 2022

Nobody said, even though we have 70 more days before the Speedy Trial Act period ends, we're going to need more time than that. Nobody said that, and there's no reason to believe that's true. … As I read it, all the district court said at the May 20th was, I excluded the time under the Speedy Trial Act for trial preparation, period.

Oral argument — Ricky Sechrest v. Renee Baker

Oral argument · Oral argument · Dec 17, 2014

This case doesn't come back to this Court on a clean slate. Of course, this Court reversed the death sentence in this matter and remanded for further proceedings on the guilt phase of the trial. … Is that the question of when this intent, this intent to commit a sexual act on Ms. Schindler arose, is very much in doubt.

Oral argument — People v. Armstrong

Oral argument · Oral argument · Feb 25, 2025

It's very possible that Armstrong was there at another time and that is how his blood ended up on the scene and that it didn't get cleaned up. … A defendant's criminal acts are the proximate cause of death when the acts contribute to that person's death, and the death is not caused by an intervening act unrelated to the defendant's acts.

Oral argument — Brox v. Woods Hole, Martha's Vyd & Nantucket S.S. Auth.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Dec 5, 2022

Kendall, in the context of an Air Force COVID-19 vaccine mandate. … We're talking about a limited period of time for one employee versus an indefinite period of time... ...possibly for years for 11 employees.

Oral argument — Womack v. MSPB

Oral argument · Oral argument · Jan 8, 2020

It boils down to the opinion in Scharf versus the Department of the Air Force, which basically says that it is not necessary for a judge, for an administrative judge, to find that the appellant is intentionally … And third, the resignation was the result of improper acts by the agency. But isn't there something curious? You can't dig it out from the record.

Oral argument — United States v. Wendell Hall

Oral argument · Oral argument · Jan 27, 2017

Frankly, the air went out of the courtroom at that point. … Did the government act in bad faith? There's nothing in the record that shows that. Was it only a small part of the evidence? Yes, it was.

Oral argument — MRL Development v. Whitecap Investment

Oral argument · Oral argument · Dec 7, 2015

And I believe that Judge Gomez's opinion did an excellent job of talking about the history of the discovery rule and did a very, very, very clean analysis on what are the distinctions and what was the … The Deceptive Trade Practices Act, that's on appeal. However, as to my clients. What is on appeal? The Deceptive Trade Practices Act claim. Right, yes.

Oral argument — United States v. Rashod Bethany

Oral argument · Oral argument · Jun 1, 2020

The court's comments that Ms. Christensen mentioned, the mandatory minimum is the furthest thing from my mind, is what the court said. … In some cases, it calls it a nullity or it becomes a clean slate. There is no sentence. Mr. Bethany was returned to the MCC. He was still convicted but not sentenced.

Oral argument — Marshall v. Evanston Skokie School District 65

Oral argument · Oral argument · Sep 9, 2014

In that time period, he was listed as having difficulty recovering from anger episodes. … Well, then how is the nexus between the failure to act or to act?

Oral argument — People v. Aguilar

Oral argument · Oral argument · Nov 17, 2010

When there's an amendment shortly after an act, you can presume that they wanted to pass it with the act. That's a 1983 case. That's correct. … They said, no, that's a bad act, and they got rid of it.

Oral argument — CFPB v. Cashcall, Inc.

Oral argument · Oral argument · Sep 9, 2019

I would note that at the beginning of our period, our claims cover, our claims began at the end of July of 2011. … So is it, I guess this kind of goes to the same thing, is it a futile effort to send it back down, or is it important that we say, hey, it was tier one for this period of time and tier two for this period

Oral argument — Smith v. Central Dauphin School District

Oral argument · Oral argument · Nov 20, 2009

It's maintained in the brief that the court aired. It points to Brennan and suggests that there's a hostile work environment. That is not what was alleged in the complaint, in the amended complaint. … I'm not saying that that's a retaliatory act in itself.

Oral argument — Yonas Fikre v. FBI

Oral argument · Oral argument · May 9, 2018

My next question is, has the government ever said that it was incorrect, that he should not have been on the list for a certain period of time? No. Okay. … We have in Claim 13 taken on FISA directly and then the subsequent claims, the Stored Communications Act, Wiretap Act. However, they're all interlocking and actually...