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
 
Virginia v. LeBlanc
Virginia v. LeBlanc. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUITPER CURIAM.Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), a state prisoner is eligible for federal habeas relief if the underlying state court merits ruling was "contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law" as determined by this Court. 28 U. S. C. §2254(d)(1). In this case, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that this demanding standard was met by a Virginia court's application of Graham v. Florida, 560 U. S. 48 (2010). The question presented is whether the Court of Appeals erred in concluding that the state court's ruling involved an unreasonable application of this Court's holding.IOn July 6, 1999,
12-jun-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1816414853
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc.
Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen 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 FEDERAL CIRCUITThe Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA or Act) provides an abbreviated pathway for obtaining Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of a drug that is biosimilar to an already licensed biological product (reference product). 42 U. S. C. §262(k). It also provides procedures for resolving patent disputes between biosimilar manufacturers (applicants) and manufacturers of reference products (sponsors).
12-jun-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1137255996
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Microsoft Corp. v. Baker
Microsoft Corp. v. Baker. (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 CIRCUITOrders granting or denying class certification are inherently interlocutory, hence not immediately reviewable under 28 U. S. C. §1291, which empowers federal courts of appeals to review only "final decisions of the district courts." In Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay, 437 U. S. 463, a 1978 decision, this Court held that the death-knell doctrine-which rested on courts' recognition that a denial of class certification would
12-jun-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT218409332
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Sessions v. Morales-Santana
Sessions v. Morales-Santana. (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 CIRCUITThe Immigration and Nationality Act provides the framework for acquisition of U. S. citizenship from birth by a child born abroad, when one parent is a U. S. citizen and the other a citizen of another nation. Applicable to married couples, the main rule in effect at the time here relevant, 8 U. S. C. §1401(a)(7) (1958 ed.), required the U. S.-citizen parent to have ten years' physical presence in the United States prior to the
12-jun-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1578969380
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Henson v. Santander Consumer USA Inc.
Henson v. Santander Consumer USA 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 FOURTH CIRCUITThe Fair Debt Collection Practices Act authorizes private lawsuits and weighty fines designed to deter the wayward practices of "debt collector[s]," a term embracing anyone who "regularly collects or attempts to collect . . . debts owed or due . . . another." 15 U. S. C. §1692a(6). The complaint filed in this case alleges that CitiFinancial Auto loaned money to petitioners seeking to buy cars; that petitioners defaulted
12-jun-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1224232521
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
North Carolina v. Covington
North Carolina v. Covington. Per CuriamON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINAPER CURIAM.The North Carolina General Assembly redrew state legislative districts in 2011 to account for population changes revealed by the 2010 census. In May 2015, several registered North Carolina voters (here called plaintiffs) brought this action in the U. S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, alleging that 28 majority-black districts in the new plan were unconstitutional racial gerrymanders. The District Court ruled for the plaintiffs in August 2016, holding that race was the predominant factor in the design of each challenged district, and that in none was that use of race "supported by a strong basis in evidence and narrowly tailored to comply with [the Voting Rights Act]." 316 F. R. D. 117, 176 (MDNC 2016).
5-jun-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT2070806115
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Kokesh v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
Kokesh v. Sec. & Exch. 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 TENTH CIRCUITThe Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC or Commission) possesses authority to investigate violations of federal securities laws and to commence enforcement actions in federal district court if its investigations uncover evidence of wrongdoing. Initially, the Commission's statutory authority in enforcement actions was limited to seeking an injunction barring future violations. Beginning in the 1970's, federal district courts,
5-jun-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1119396511
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Impression Prods., Inc. v. Lexmark Int'l, Inc.
Impression Prods., Inc. v. Lexmark Int'l, 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 FEDERAL CIRCUITA United States patent entitles the patent holder to "exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling [its] invention throughout the United States or importing the invention into the United States." 35 U. S. C. §154(a). Whoever engages in one of these acts "without authority" from the patentee may face liability for patent infringement. §271(a). When a patentee sells one of its products,
30-may-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1684630271
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
BNSF Ry. Co. v. Tyrrell
BNSF Ry. Co. v. Tyrrell. (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 MONTANAThe Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA), 45 U. S. C. §51 et seq., makes railroads liable in money damages to their employees for on-the-job injuries. Respondent Robert Nelson, a North Dakota resident, brought a FELA suit against petitioner BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) in a Montana state court, alleging that he had sustained injuries while working for BNSF. Respondent Kelli Tyrrell, appointed in South Dakota as the administrator of her husband Brent
30-may-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1713876210
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Cnty. of L.A. v. Mendez
Cnty. of L.A. v. Mendez. (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 CIRCUITThe Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department received word from a confidential informant that a potentially armed and dangerous parolee-at-large had been seen at a certain residence. While other officers searched the main house, Deputies Conley and Pederson searched the back of the property where, unbeknownst to the deputies, respondents Mendez and Garcia were napping inside a shack where they lived. Without a search warrant and without
30-may-2017 |  US Supreme Court|U.S.  |  2017SCT1469013348
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 227348 (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