
	Where results make sense

Topic: United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Related Topics

United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

United States court of appeals

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

Pennsylvania

	United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		Acheson was appointed as a circuit judge for the Third Circuit in 1891 by Benjamin Harrison.
		Aside from their duties on the Commerce Court, the judges of the Commerce Court also acted as at-large appellate judges, able to be assigned by the Chief Justice of the United States to whichever circuit most needed help.
		Unlike the Chief Justice of the United States, a Chief Judge returns to active service after the expiration of his or her term and does not create a vacancy on the bench by the fact of his or her promotion.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Third_Circuit (798 words)

	UNITED ARTISTS THEATRE CIRCUIT, INC
		United Artists claims that its failure to construct the road improvement was a mere pretext for the Township's refusal to support its theater proposal and that this refusal was actually motivated by the Township's desire to obtain an impact fee from Goodman and Regency Cinema.
		United Artists claims that this statement "constitutes a conclusive determination that may not be disturbed under the law of the case doctrine." Br.
		In the prior appeal, this Court expressly affirmed the District Court's qualified immunity analysis of the supervisors as a whole, and found the only error to be the District Court's failure to apply that same analysis to the supervisors individually.
	law.wustl.edu /landuselaw/UnitedArtist.htm (7706 words)

	Third Circuit Opinion in ACLU v. Reno II
		As a result, the Court held that the CDA was not tailored so narrowly as to achieve the government's compelling interest in protecting minors, and that it lacked the precision that the First Amendment requires when a statute regulates the content of speech.
		District Court's Conclusions of Law Initially, the government moved the District Court to dismiss the ACLU's action insofar as the individuals and entities that it purported to represent were not in danger of prosecution under COPA and therefore lacked standing.
		Although much attention at the District Court level was focused on the availability, virtues and effectiveness of voluntary blocking or filtering software that can enable parents to limit the harmful material to which their children may otherwise be exposed, the parental hand should not be looked to as a substitute for a congressional mandate.
	www.epic.org /free_speech/copa/3d_cir_opinion.html (7440 words)

	Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll, LLP \| Press Room \| News & Publications \| (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-23)
		The Third Circuit ultimately remanded the case to the district court to allow the district court the opportunity to probe the potential conflict of interest created by the plan administration structure and operation at issue in the case.
		The plaintiff brought suit in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey under Section 502(a)(1)(B) of ERISA, seeking the LTD benefits to which she claimed she was entitled.
		On appeal, the Third Circuit held that the district court’s application of an unmodified arbitrary and capricious standard of review was inappropriate given the abnormalities apparent in the appeals process.
	www.ballardspahr.com /press/article.asp?ID=1092 (702 words)

	US CODE: Title 48,1613a. Appellate jurisdiction of District Court; procedure; review by United States Court of Appeals ...
		Appeals to the District Court of the Virgin Islands shall be heard and determined by an appellate division of the court consisting of three judges, of whom two shall constitute a quorum.
		The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit shall have jurisdiction of appeals from all final decisions of the district court on appeal from the courts established by local law.
		Upon the establishment of the appellate court provided for in section 1611 (a) of this title all appeals from the decisions of the courts of the Virgin Islands established by local law not previously taken must be taken to that appellate court.
	www.law.cornell.edu /uscode/html/uscode48/usc_sec_48_00001613---a000-.html (344 words)

	[No title]
		On September 9, 2002, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, affirming the district court, held that a proposed class action alleging a price-fixing conspiracy among major United States airlines must be dismissed under the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act ("FTAIA"), 15 U.S.C. § 6a.
		The district court agreed and dismissed the complaint.
		The court held that because the airlines were involved in "trade or commerce" with foreign nations rather than "import trade or commerce," plaintiffs' complaint could not survive under the FTAIA unless the challenged conduct had a "direct, substantial, and reasonably foreseeable" anticompetitive effect in the United States.
	www.omm.com /webdata/content/publications/client_alert_antitrust_2002_09_13.htm (595 words)

	[No title]
		The opinion of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is reported at 784 F.2d 505 and is present in the Appendix to the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (hereinafter sometimes Petition), p.
		On appeal, the judgment of the district court was reversed and the case was remanded for proceedings consistent with the opinion, Al-Khazraji v.
		Counsel for petitioner is not aware of any Third Circuit case or case decided by a District Court in the Circuit, decided prior to the filing of the instant case in November of 1980, that held that the six year statute of limitations applied to a § 1981 denial of tenure case.
	www.yale.edu /lawweb/avalon/curiae/html/481-604/old/03.htm (6586 words)

	[No title]
		The court found that the ADA enforcement provision, 42 U.S.C. 12188, incorporates not only the remedies and procedures of subsection 204(a) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to which it specifically refers, but also subsection 204(c) of the 1964 Act, which the court found requires exhaustion of available state and local administrative remedies.
		Because subsection 204(c) of the 1964 Act gives the district court in which an action is filed pursuant to 204(a) the authority to "stay proceedings in such civil action pending the termination of State or local enforcement proceedings," 42 U.S.C. 2000a-3(c), the district court's decision could cause a substantial delay.
		The Court stated that its decision was "a fairly routine application of the traditional rule of statutory construction pithily captured in the Latin maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius." Ibid.
	www.usdoj.gov /crt/foia/pa8.txt (1985 words)

	WRF \| Mass Media Update \| United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Issues Media Ownership Decision
		However, the Third Circuit has noted that after necessary recusals, too few judges are available to permit rehearing en banc, and that any request for rehearing will be addressed by the same panel that decided the case.
		While the case was pending before the appeals court, however, Congress effectively superseded the FCC’s determination with a directive to set the cap at 39 percent.
		The court concluded that the FCC was justified in determining a blanket ban on newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership was no longer in the public interest.
	www.wrf.com /publications/publication.asp?id=927477272004 (867 words)

	[No title]
		JURISDICTION The judgment of the court of appeals was entered on September 24, 1996.
		In his brief to the Third Circuit, petitioner alleged, inter alia, that prior to September 1990, he tried to appeal the ALJ decision by telephoning the Altoona Social Security Office; he maintained that the Altoona office neither processed his ___________________(footnotes) 1 Petitioner also requested review of an 1994 overpayment claim.
		Since that fact-bound assertion was not raised by petitioner at either the district court or the court of appeals, level, it should not be considered by this Court.
	www.usdoj.gov /osg/briefs/1996/w967411w.txt (807 words)

	Saxe v.State College Area School District ,United Court State Of Appeals For The Third Circuit - No. 99-4081 (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-23)
		The Court rejected the plaintiffs' characterization of the Policy as a "hate speech code," holding instead that it merely prohibits harassment that is already unlawful under state and federal law.
		The U.S. Supreme Court held that the state court's narrowing construction failed to solve the law's vagueness problems and that, in light of the existing authoritative interpretation, the federal courts were without power to further limit the statute.
		Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
	www.securitymanagement.com /library/Saxe_Statecollege0501.html (9923 words)

	DONALD P. JACOBS - Budd Larner
		The New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, reversed a judgment entered after a jury trial and held that defendants were entitled to judgment on plaintiff's claims of trademark infringement, counterfeiting and unfair competition under the Lanham Act and on plaintiff's claim of unfair competition under state law.
		United States Courts of Appeals for the Third, Seventh, Eighth and Ninth Circuits
		United States District Courts for the Southern District of New York, New Jersey, and Eastern District of Pennsylvania
	www.buddlarner.com /Attorneys/donjac.htm (694 words)

	Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger & Vecchione (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-23)
		CLI appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, arguing, among other things, that plaintiff failed to prove that she was "disabled" within the meaning of the ADA and that, even if she had, the ADA capped all of her compensatory and punitive damages at $300,000.
		In this regard, the court explained that plaintiff had provided, among other things, expert and lay witness testimony that her MS produced her fatigue which significantly limited her ability to concentrate and remember and that her supervisor recognized these problems she was experiencing.
		Ultimately, the Third Circuit's ruling in Gagliardo virtually eliminates that aspect of Section 1981a that sought to reasonably limit the size of jury awards in federal employment discrimination cases whenever a substantially similar claim can be successfully maintained under state law.
	www.gibbonslaw.com /publications/articlesuser2.cfm?pubid=1019 (1085 words)

	NAF \| Public Policy \| Get Informed/Get Active \| NAF Took a Stand \| Judicial Nominations \| Michael Fisher \| A Letter of ...
		The undersigned organizations, representing countless Americans in the Third Circuit and across the country, are extremely dismayed that a hearing has been scheduled for next week on the nomination of Pennsylvania Attorney General Michael Fisher to fill a vacancy on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
		Fisher's presence on the Third Circuit bench while his case is being heard would create, at the very least, perceived conflicts of interest and a significant appearance of impropriety.
		For these reasons, we strongly urge the Committee to postpone consideration of Michael Fisher's nomination to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit until the verdict against him has been fully resolved and the matter can be properly considered by the Committee.
	www.prochoice.org /policy/get_informed_active/recent_positions/nominations/fisher_letter.html (896 words)

	WRF \| U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Issues Media Ownership Decision
		In doing so, the Third Circuit extended the stay on implementation of the new media ownership rules the Court had imposed last fall.
		The Court found that the FCC’s derivation of new Cross-Media Limits, and its modification of the numerical limits on both television and radio station ownership in local markets, all have the same essential flaw: an unjustified assumption that media outlets of the same type make an equal contribution to diversity and competition.
		Cross-Media Limits: The Court concluded that the FCC was justified in determining a blanket ban on newspaper/broadcast cross-ownership was no longer in the public interest.
	www.wrf.com /publication.cfm?pf=1&publication_id=8511 (802 words)

	VersusLaw Search Page
		The district court instructed the jury on the issues of express warranty and implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose.
		As other courts have recognized,38 this type of language provides no real indication that the party is willing to forego the transaction if the additional language is not included in the contract.
		Questions remained, however, as to whether the use of state contract law to avoid the first sale doctrine would be preempted either by the federal copyright statute (statutory preemption) or by the exclusive constitutional grant of authority over copyright issues to the federal government (constitutional preemption).
	www.badsoftware.com /stepsave.htm (8342 words)

	United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - LexisNexis InfoPro - Zimmerman's Research Guide
		The Third Circuit handles appeals from Federal trial courts located in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware and the Virgin Islands.
		The Third Circuit's Web site posts court rules and procedures, contact information, forms, court calendars and opinions from the past week; docket sheets are available with a Pacer password (www.ca3.uscourts.gov).
		Opinions: In addition to the current week's opinions posted on the Court's Web site, opinions back to May 1994 are posted free by the Villanova law school library (http://vls.law.vill.edu/Locator/3/index.htm) and Findlaw (http://www.findlaw.com/casecode/courts/3rd.html), which provides basic searching.
	www.lexisnexis.com /infopro/zimmerman/disp.aspx?z=2062 (243 words)

	United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - dKosopedia
		The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the following United States District Courts:
		The court is based at the U.S. Courthouse in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
		As of Michael Chertoff's resignation on February 15, 2005, the judges on the court are:
	www.dkosopedia.com /index.php/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Third_Circuit (194 words)

	United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
		The opinions issued by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit since May 1994 have been acquired from the Third Circuit by the Villanova University School of Law.
		Villanova Law Library is the official archive for the opinions of the Third Circuit.
		For the most up-to-date opinion releases during a given month, see Precedential or Non-Precedential listings at the 3rd circuit website.
	vls.law.vill.edu /Locator/3/index.htm (176 words)

	Talk:United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		Talk:United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
		It says that this is the court as of the elevation of Alito to the Supreme Court.
		So it's no longer a table of the court as of Alito's elevation but as of Rosenn's death.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Talk:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Third_Circuit (342 words)

	Third Judicial Circuit
		Libraries of the United States Court of Appeals for The Third Circuit
		The Third Circuit does not control or guarantee the accuracy, timeliness or completeness of this outside information.
		Further, the inclusion of links or pointers to particular items in hypertext is not intended to reflect their importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or products or services offered, on these outside sites, or the organizations sponsoring the sites.
	www.ca3.uscourts.gov (290 words)

	US Senator Orrin Hatch
		In 1990, former President Bush appointed him to be the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey.
		Chertoff again served as Special Counsel for the New Jersey Senate Judiciary Committee during its hearings into the application of Megan's Law, which requires state correction officials to notify prosecutors 90 days prior to the release of a sex offender, and the reasons why it was not being systematically employed by the state.
		Chertoff, stating, "We are pleased that the President has selected a distinguished New Jerseyan for this important seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
	hatch.senate.gov /index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=807&Month=6&Year=2003 (1229 words)

	FindLaw: Case Law: 3rd Circuit
		FindLaw's searchable database of the 3rd Circuit Court decisions since May 1994.
		U.S Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit) Features opinions, dockets, rules, procedures, forms and more.
		U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit Opinions From Villanova Law School.
	www.findlaw.com /casecode/courts/3rd.html (305 words)

	Honeywell's Response to United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Decision: Interfaith Community ... (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-23)
		Honeywell's Response to United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Decision: Interfaith Community Organization v.
		"In May 2003, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey ordered the excavation of approximately one million tons of chromium residue at a predecessor company site in Jersey City, New Jersey.
		"The company appealed the court's decision because it believes that capping the site is a better long-term environmental solution that will allow for productive redevelopment sooner than the court-ordered excavation.
	www.tmcnet.com /scripts/print-page.aspx?PagePrint=http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2005/Feb/1119557.htm (503 words)

	Armstrong Holdings, Inc. :: Armstrong Announces Court of Appeals Decision (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-23)
		The decisions of both courts are available at http://www.armstrongplan.com/.
		AWI had appealed the District Court's determination that, under the facts of this case, the distribution of warrants to current Armstrong stockholders under the POR was not permissible.
		AWI has been investigating other options to resolve this Chapter 11 case with the representatives of its creditor groups.
	sev.prnewswire.com /construction-building/20060103/PHTU02903012006-1.html (297 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)