Microjuris Puerto Rico
 
Favor entrar Usuario y/o Clave


 
Leyes
   LPRA-Índice Dinámico
   LPR-Catálogo de Leyes
   Reglas
   Reglamentos
Decisiones
   DPR-Tribunal Supremo
   TA-Tribunal de Apelaciones
Trámite Legislativo
   eLegislativo
   Informes Legislativos
Federal
   US Supreme Court
   Circuit Courts
   District Court (PR)
   Bankruptcy (PR)
   USC
   CFR
Doctrina
   Revistas
Compendia
   Laboral
   Contributivo
   Ambiental
Servicios
   AYUDA
   SherLAWck-Alerts
   Web Mail


 
Guardar Búsquedas
 MJPR_Apelativo
 

IntelliSearch


¿Su consulta es en inglés?No
  • Búsqueda por:

Filtrar por:

Colección  
  • Todas  
  • LPRA
  • LPR
  • DPR
  • Apelaciones
  • Reglamentos
  • Revistas
  • OSJ
  • eLegislativo
  • Supreme Court-Federal
  • Circuit Courts-Federal
  • 1st Circuit-Federal
  • District Court-Federal
  • Bankruptcy-Federal
  • USC-Federal
  • CFR-Federal
Inicio » Resultados
Cambiar Tamaño del Texto Crear PDF de esta página Enviar esta página por Email Imprimir esta página
 
Manrique v. United States
Manrique v. United States. (Slip Opinion)SyllabusNOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUITAfter federal agents found child pornography on petitioner's computer, he pleaded guilty to possessing a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct, in violation of 18 U. S. C. §§2252(a)(4)(B) and (b)(2), an offense requiring a district court to "make restitution to the victim of the offense," §3663A(a)(1). The District Court entered an initial judgment sentencing petitioner to a term of imprisonment. It
19-abr-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1324028477
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Nelson v. Madden
Nelson v. Madden. (Slip Opinion)SyllabusNOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.Petitioner Shannon Nelson was convicted by a Colorado jury of two felonies and three misdemeanors arising from the alleged sexual and physical abuse of her four children. The trial court imposed a prison term of 20 years to life and ordered her to pay $8,192.50 in court costs, fees, and restitution. On appeal, Nelson's conviction was reversed for trial error, and on retrial, she was acquitted of all charges.Petitioner Louis Alonzo Madden was convicted by a Colorado jury of attempting to patronize a
19-abr-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT51843119
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger. (Slip Opinion)SyllabusNOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUITRespondents Leroy, Donna, Barry, and Suzanne Haeger sued petitioner Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, alleging that the failure of a Goodyear G159 tire caused the family's motorhome to swerve off the road and flip over. After several years of contentious discovery, marked by Goodyear's slow response to repeated requests for internal G159 test results, the parties settled the case. Some months later, the Haegers' lawyer
18-abr-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT286417402
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Coventry Health Care of Mo., Inc. v. Nevils
Coventry Health Care of Mo., Inc. v. Nevils. (Slip Opinion)SyllabusNOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURIThe Federal Employees Health Benefits Act of 1959 (FEHBA) authorizes the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to contract with private carriers for federal employees' health insurance. 5 U. S. C. §8902(a), (d). FEHBA contains an express-preemption provision, §8902(m)(1), which states that the "terms of any contract under this chapter which relate to the nature, provision, or extent of coverage or benefits (including payments with respect to
18-abr-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT819352369
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Dean v. United States
Dean v. United States. (Slip Opinion)SyllabusNOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUITPetitioner Dean and his brother committed two robberies of drug dealers. During each robbery, Dean's brother threatened and assaulted the victim with a gun, while Dean searched the premises for valuables. Dean was convicted of multiple robbery and firearms counts, as well as two counts of possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U. S. C. §924(c). Section 924(c) criminalizes using or carrying a
3-abr-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1610716710
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
McLane Co. v. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n
McLane Co. v. Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n. (Slip Opinion)SyllabusNOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUITDamiana Ochoa worked for eight years in a physically demanding job for petitioner McLane Co., a supply-chain services company. McLane requires employees in those positions-both new employees and those returning from medical leave-to take a physical evaluation. When Ochoa returned from three months of maternity leave, she failed the evaluation three times and was fired. She then filed a sex discrimination charge
3-abr-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1853735911
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman
Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman. (Slip Opinion)SyllabusNOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUITNew York General Business Law §518 provides that "[n]o seller in any sales transaction may impose a surcharge on a holder who elects to use a credit card in lieu of payment by cash, check, or similar means." Petitioners, five New York businesses and their owners who wish to impose surcharges for credit card use, filed suit against state officials, arguing that the law violates the First Amendment by regulating how they
29-mar-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT445200641
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Moore v. Texas
Moore v. Texas. (Slip Opinion)SyllabusNOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXASPetitioner Moore was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death for fatally shooting a store clerk during a botched robbery that occurred when Moore was 20 years old. A state habeas court subsequently determined that, under Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U. S. 304, and Hall v. Florida, 572 U. S. ___, Moore qualified as intellectually disabled and that his death sentence therefore violated the Eighth Amendment's proscription of "cruel
28-mar-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT596034633
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Star Athletica, L. L. C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.
Star Athletica, L. L. C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.. (Slip Opinion)SyllabusNOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUITThe Copyright Act of 1976 makes "pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features" of the "design of a useful article" eligible for copyright protection as artistic works if those features "can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article." 17 U. S. C. §101.Respondents have more than 200 copyright registrations for two-dimensional
22-mar-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1777398694
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp.
Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp.. (Slip Opinion)SyllabusNOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUITThere are three possible conclusions to a Chapter 11 bankruptcy. First, debtor and creditors may negotiate a plan to govern the distribution of the estate's value. See, e.g., 11 U. S. C. §§1121, 1123, 1129, 1141. Second, the bankruptcy court may convert the case to Chapter 7 for liquidation of the business and distribution of its assets to creditors. §§1112(a), (b), 726. Finally, the bankruptcy court may
22-mar-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1765820158
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Resultados 1 al 10 de 254746 (aprox.)Página: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >>

Política de Privacidad |   Términos y Condiciones  |    @FaceBook |   @Twitter | Sitemap   |    Últimas entradas (RSS)   |    Blog Corporativo

INICIO

MI PERFIL

BÚSQUEDA POR:

QUÉ OFRECEMOS PRODUCTOS SERVICIOS AYUDA CONTÁCTANOS
 

» Prueba la nueva versión de Microjuris.com OK