DOCSLIB.ORG

Lower Courts of the United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lower Courts of the United States 68 U.S. GOVERNMENT MANUAL The library is open to members of the bar of the Court, attorneys for the various Federal departments and agencies, and Members of Congress. Only members of the bar of the Court may practice before the Supreme Court. The term of the Court begins, by law, the first Monday in October of each year and continues as long as the business before the Court requires, usually until about the end of June. Six members constitute a quorum. Approximately 7,000 cases are passed upon in the course of a term. In addition, some 1,200 applications of various kinds are filed each year that can be acted upon by a single Justice. Jurisdiction According to the and Fact, with such Exceptions, and Constitution (art. III, sec. 2), ``[t]he under such Regulations as the Congress judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, shall make.'' in Law and Equity, arising under this Appellate jurisdiction has been Constitution, the Laws of the United conferred upon the Supreme Court by States, and Treaties made, or which shall various statutes, under the authority be made, under their Authority;Ðto all given Congress by the Constitution. The Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;Ðto all basic statute effective at this time in Cases of admiralty and maritime conferring and controlling jurisdiction of Jurisdiction;Ðto Controversies to which the Supreme Court may be found in 28 the United States shall be a Party;Ðto U.S.C. 1251, 1253, 1254, 1257±1259, Controversies between two or more and various special statutes. Congress States;Ðbetween a State and Citizens of has no authority to change the original another State;Ðbetween Citizens of jurisdiction of this Court. different States;Ðbetween Citizens of the Rulemaking Power Congress has from same State claiming Lands under Grants time to time conferred upon the of different States, and between a State, Supreme Court power to prescribe rules or the Citizens thereof, and foreign of procedure to be followed by the States, Citizens or Subjects. lower courts of the United States. ``In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, Pursuant to these statutes there are now other public Ministers and Consuls, and in force rules promulgated by the Court those in which a State shall be Party, the to govern civil and criminal cases in the supreme Court shall have original district courts, bankruptcy proceedings, Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before admiralty cases, appellate proceedings, mentioned, the supreme Court shall have and the trial of misdemeanors before appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law U.S. magistrate judges. For further information concerning the Supreme Court, contact the Public Information Office, United States Supreme Court Building, One First Street NE., Washington, DC 20543. Phone, 202±479±3211. Lower Courts Article III of the Constitution declares, in office during good behavior, with no section 1, that the judicial power of the power in Congress to provide United States shall be invested in one otherwise.'' Supreme Court and in ``such inferior United States Courts of Appeals The Courts as the Congress may from time to courts of appeals are intermediate time ordain and establish.'' The Supreme appellate courts created by act of March Court has held that these constitutional 3, 1891 (28 U.S.C. ch. 3), to relieve the courts ``. .. share in the exercise of the Supreme Court of considering all appeals judicial power defined in that section, in cases originally decided by the can be invested with no other Federal trial courts. They are empowered jurisdiction, and have judges who hold to review all final decisions and certain VerDate 18-JUN-99 11:09 Jul 20, 1999 Jkt 185193 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 6997 Sfmt 6997 C:\RECORD\185193.009 pfrm12 PsN: pfrm12 JUDICIAL BRANCH 69 interlocutory decisions (18 U.S.C. 3731; judge of each circuit and a district judge 28 U.S.C. 1291, 1292) of district courts. elected from each of the 12 geographical They also are empowered to review and circuits, together with the chief judge of enforce orders of many Federal the Court of International Trade, serve as administrative bodies. The decisions of members of the Judicial Conference of the courts of appeals are final except as the United States, over which the Chief they are subject to review on writ of Justice of the United States presides. This certiorari by the Supreme Court. is the governing body for the The United States is divided administration of the Federal judicial geographically into 12 judicial circuits, system as a whole (28 U.S.C. 331). including the District of Columbia. Each United States Court of Appeals for the circuit has a court of appeals (28 U.S.C. Federal Circuit This court was 41, 1294). Each of the 50 States is established under Article III of the assigned to one of the circuits, and the Constitution pursuant to the Federal Territories are assigned variously to the Courts Improvement Act of 1982 (28 first, third, and ninth circuits. There is U.S.C. 41, 44, 48), as successor to the also a Court of Appeals for the Federal former United States Court of Customs Circuit, which has nationwide and Patent Appeals and the United jurisdiction defined by subject matter. At States Court of Claims. The jurisdiction present each court of appeals has from 6 of the court is nationwide (as provided to 28 permanent circuit judgeships (179 by 28 U.S.C. 1295) and includes appeals in all), depending upon the amount of from the district courts in patent cases; judicial work in the circuit. Circuit appeals from the district courts in judges hold their offices during good contract, and certain other civil actions behavior as provided by Article III, in which the United States is a section 1, of the Constitution. The judge defendant; and appeals from final senior in commission who is under 70 decisions of the U.S. Court of years of age (65 at inception of term), International Trade, the U.S. Court of has been in office at least 1 year, and Federal Claims, and the U.S. Court of has not previously been chief judge, Appeals for Veterans Claims. The serves as the chief judge of the circuit jurisdiction of the court also includes the for a 7-year term. One of the justices of review of administrative rulings by the the Supreme Court is assigned as circuit Patent and Trademark Office, U.S. justice for each of the 13 judicial International Trade Commission, circuits. Each court of appeals normally Secretary of Commerce, agency boards hears cases in panels consisting of three of contract appeals, and the Merit judges but may sit en banc with all Systems Protection Board, as well as judges present. The judges of each circuit (except the rulemaking of the Department of Federal Circuit) by vote determine the Veterans Affairs; review of decisions of size of the judicial council for the the U.S. Senate Select Committee on circuit, which consists of the chief judge Ethics concerning discrimination claims and an equal number of circuit and of Senate employees; and review of a district judges. The council considers the final order of an entity to be designated state of Federal judicial business in the by the President concerning circuit and may ``make all necessary and discrimination claims of Presidential appropriate orders for [its] effective and appointees. expeditious administration . .'' (28 The court consists of 12 circuit judges. U.S.C. 332). The chief judge of each It sits in panels of three or more on each circuit may summon periodically a case and may also hear or rehear a case judicial conference of all judges of the en banc. The court sits principally in circuit, including members of the bar, to Washington, DC, and may hold court discuss the business of the Federal courts wherever any court of appeals sits (28 of the circuit (28 U.S.C. 333). The chief U.S.C. 48). VerDate 18-JUN-99 11:09 Jul 20, 1999 Jkt 185193 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6997 Sfmt 6997 C:\RECORD\185193.009 pfrm12 PsN: pfrm12 70 U.S. GOVERNMENT MANUAL Judicial CircuitsÐUnited States Courts of Appeals Circuit Judges Official Station District of Columbia Circuit (Clerk: Mark J. Langer; Circuit Justice Circuit Executive: Jill C. Sayenga; Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist Washington, DC) Circuit Judges Harry T. Edwards, Chief Judge Washington, DC Patricia M. Wald Washington, DC Laurence H. Silberman Washington, DC Stephen F. Williams Washington, DC Douglas H. Ginsburg Washington, DC David Bryan Sentelle Washington, DC Karen LeCraft Henderson Washington, DC A. Raymond Randolph Washington, DC Judith W. Rogers Washington, DC David S. Tatel Washington, DC Merrick B. Garland Washington, DC (Vacancy) First Circuit Districts of Maine, New Circuit Justice Hampshire, Massachusetts, Justice David H. Souter Rhode Island, and Puerto Rico (Clerk: Phoebe Morse; Circuit Judges Circuit Executive: Juan R. Torruella, Chief Judge Hato Rey, PR Vincent F. Flanagan; Bruce M. Selya Providence, RI Boston, MA) Michael Boudin Boston, MA Norman H. Stahl Concord, NH Sandra L. Lynch Boston, MA Kermit V. Lipez Portland, ME Second Circuit Districts of Vermont, Circuit Justice Connecticut, northern New Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg York, southern New York, eastern New York, and Circuit Judges western New York Ralph K. Winter, Jr., Chief Judge New Haven, CT (Clerk: Carolyn Clark Campbell; Amalya Lyle Kearse New York, NY Circuit Executive: Karen Milton, John M. Walker, Jr. New Haven, CT Acting ;New York, NY) Dennis G. Jacobs New York, NY Pierre N. Leval New York, NY Guido Calabresi New Haven, CT Jose A. Cabranes New Haven, CT Fred I.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Fellows of the American Bar Foundation
    THE FELLOWS OF THE AMERICAN BAR FOUNDATION 2015-2016 2015-2016 Fellows Officers: Chair Hon. Cara Lee T. Neville (Ret.) Chair – Elect Michael H. Byowitz Secretary Rew R. Goodenow Immediate Past Chair Kathleen J. Hopkins The Fellows is an honorary organization of attorneys, judges and law professors whose pro- fessional, public and private careers have demonstrated outstanding dedication to the welfare of their communities and to the highest principles of the legal profession. Established in 1955, The Fellows encourage and support the research program of the American Bar Foundation. The American Bar Foundation works to advance justice through ground-breaking, independ- ent research on law, legal institutions, and legal processes. Current research covers meaning- ful topics including legal needs of ordinary Americans and how justice gaps can be filled; the changing nature of legal careers and opportunities for more diversity within the profession; social and political costs of mass incarceration; how juries actually decide cases; the ability of China’s criminal defense lawyers to protect basic legal freedoms; and, how to better prepare for end of life decision-making. With the generous support of those listed on the pages that follow, the American Bar Founda- tion is able to truly impact the very foundation of democracy and the future of our global soci- ety. The Fellows of the American Bar Foundation 750 N. Lake Shore Drive, 4th Floor Chicago, IL 60611-4403 (800) 292-5065 Fax: (312) 564-8910 [email protected] www.americanbarfoundation.org/fellows OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS OF THE Rew R. Goodenow, Secretary AMERICAN BAR FOUNDATION Parsons Behle & Latimer David A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007
    American University Law Review Volume 56 | Issue 4 Article 1 2007 Price of Popularity: The ourC t of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007 Jay S. Plager United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/aulr Part of the Courts Commons Recommended Citation Plager, Jay S. “Price of Popularity: The ourC t of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007.” American University Law Review 56, no. 4 (February 2007): 751-760. This Foreword is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Price of Popularity: The ourC t of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007 Abstract This year marked the twenty-fifth nniva ersary of the establishment of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The nniva ersary was acknowledged with appropriate ceremony, including an en banc session of the court on April 2 attended by various luminaries in the judicial and political branches of the United States. The somewhat tongue-in-cheek title of this essay is intended to suggest an important idea about the court today: with increased visibility, significance, and impact have come consequences, some desirable, some not. This essay undertook a brief review of how the court got where it is, and a look at what these consequences may be.
    [Show full text]
  • Articles Lightened Scrutiny
    VOLUME 124 MARCH 2011 NUMBER 5 © 2011 by The Harvard Law Review Association ARTICLES LIGHTENED SCRUTINY Bert I. Huang TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1111 I. DEFERENCE ADRIFT? ........................................................................................................... 1116 A. The Judges’ Hypothesis .................................................................................................... 1118 B. In Search of Evidence ...................................................................................................... 1119 II. A NATURAL EXPERIMENT: “THE SURGE” ..................................................................... 1121 A. The Unusual Origins of the Surge ................................................................................... 1122 B. Toward a Causal Story ..................................................................................................... 1123 C. A Second Experiment ....................................................................................................... 1126 III. FINDINGS: LIGHTENED SCRUTINY ............................................................................... 1127 A. The Data ............................................................................................................................. 1127 B. Revealed Deference ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • United States Court of Appeals
    United States Court of Appeals Fifth Federal Judicial Circuit Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas Circuit Judges Priscilla R. Owen, Chief Judge ...............903 San Jacinto Blvd., Rm. 434 ..................................................... (512) 916-5167 Austin, Texas 78701-2450 Carl E. Stewart ......................................300 Fannin St., Ste. 5226 ............................................................... (318) 676-3765 Shreveport, LA 71101-3425 Edith H. Jones .......................................515 Rusk St., U.S. Courthouse, Rm. 12505 ................................... (713) 250-5484 Houston, Texas 77002-2655 Jerry E. Smith ........................................515 Rusk St., U.S. Courthouse, Rm. 12621 ................................... (713) 250-5101 Houston, Texas 77002-2698 James L. Dennis ....................................600 Camp St., Rm. 219 .................................................................. (504) 310-8000 New Orleans, LA 70130-3425 Jennifer Walker Elrod ........................... 515 Rusk St., U.S. Courthouse, Rm. 12014 .................................. (713) 250-7590 Houston, Texas 77002-2603 Leslie H. Southwick ...............................501 E. Court St., Ste. 3.750 ........................................................... (601) 608-4760 Jackson, MS 39201 Catharina Haynes .................................1100 Commerce St., Rm. 1452 ..................................................... (214) 753-2750 Dallas, Texas 75242 James E. Graves Jr. ................................501 E. Court
    [Show full text]
  • Regulating Local Variations in Federal Sentencing
    BIBAS LOCAL VARIATIONS IN FEDERAL SENTENCING 58 STAN. L. REV. 137 10/28/2005 1:29:23 PM REGULATING LOCAL VARIATIONS IN FEDERAL SENTENCING Stephanos Bibas* INTRODUCTION................................................................................................ 137 I. TYPES, COSTS, AND SOURCES OF LOCAL VARIATION.................................. 139 A. Justified and Unjustified Types of Local Variation............................. 139 B. Sources of Local Variation.................................................................. 141 II. A CASE STUDY OF UNJUSTIFIED VARIATION: FAST-TRACK PROGRAMS.... 145 III. A MIXED BAG: SUBSTANTIAL ASSISTANCE DEPARTURES ........................ 148 A. How Substantial Assistance Works in Practice................................... 148 B. How To Achieve the Right Blend of Uniformity .................................. 151 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................... 154 INTRODUCTION While federalism justifies variations among state laws, federal criminal law is supposed to be a uniform national response to crimes of national import. On paper, a single set of federal criminal statutes and Federal Sentencing Guidelines applies uniformly throughout the United States. But in practice, federal criminal charges and sentences vary greatly from state to state and from district to district. For example, some districts regularly prosecute low-level drug offenders. Others set high drug-quantity thresholds for charging and refer less significant cases
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Courts of the United States
    68 U.S. GOVERNMENT MANUAL include the Administrative Assistant to of procedure to be followed by the the Chief Justice, the Clerk, the Reporter lower courts of the United States. of Decisions, the Librarian, the Marshal, Court Term The term of the Court the Director of Budget and Personnel, begins on the first Monday in October the Court Counsel, the Curator, the and lasts until the first Monday in Director of Data Systems, and the Public October of the next year. Approximately 8,000 cases are filed with the Court in Information Officer. the course of a term, and some 1,000 Appellate Jurisdiction Appellate applications of various kinds are filed jurisdiction has been conferred upon the each year that can be acted upon by a Supreme Court by various statutes under single Justice. the authority given Congress by the Access to Facilities The Supreme Court Constitution. The basic statute effective is open to the public from 9 a.m. to 4:30 at this time in conferring and controlling p.m., Monday through Friday, except on jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may Federal legal holidays. Unless the Court be found in 28 U.S.C. 1251, 1253, or Chief Justice orders otherwise, the 1254, 1257–1259, and various special Clerk’s office is open from 9 a.m. to 5 statutes. Congress has no authority to p.m., Monday through Friday, except on change the original jurisdiction of this Federal legal holidays. The library is Court. open to members of the bar of the Court, Rulemaking Power Congress has from attorneys for the various Federal time to time conferred upon the departments and agencies, and Members Supreme Court power to prescribe rules of Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the Proceedings of the Judicial Conference
    -REPORTOF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES MARCH 16, 1999 WASHINGTON, D.C. JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES CHIEFJUSTICE WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST, PRESIDING LEONIDAS RALPH MECHAM, SECRETARY REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES March 16, 1999 Contents Call of the Conference........................... ......... ....4 Reports ...................................... ........ ....4 Elections...................................... .......... ....4 Executive Committee............................ .... ... ...4 Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance ........ .......... ....5 Budgetary Matters......................... .... .... ..6 Federal Courts Improvement Legislation ......... .... ... ...6 Miscellaneous Actions...................... ......... ....7 Committee on the Administrative Office .............. ......... ....7 Committee Activities....................... .......... ....8 Committee on Automation and Technology ........... ......... ....8 Courtroom Technologies .................... ...... ... 8 Long Range Plan for Information Technology. ....... ... 8 Access to Internet Sites .................... Committee on the Administration of the Bankruptcy System .............. .9 Bankruptcy Judgeships ................................... .9 Bankruptcy Estate Administration ........................... 10 Committee on the Budget....................................... Committee Activities..................................... Committee on Codes of Conduct.................................
    [Show full text]
  • An Empirical Study of the Ideologies of Judges on the Unites States
    JUDGED BY THE COMPANY YOU KEEP: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF THE IDEOLOGIES OF JUDGES ON THE UNITED STATES COURTS OF APPEALS Corey Rayburn Yung* Abstract: Although there has been an explosion of empirical legal schol- arship about the federal judiciary, with a particular focus on judicial ide- ology, the question remains: how do we know what the ideology of a judge actually is? For federal courts below the U.S. Supreme Court, legal aca- demics and political scientists have offered only crude proxies to identify the ideologies of judges. This Article attempts to cure this deficiency in empirical research about the federal courts by introducing a new tech- nique for measuring the ideology of judges based upon judicial behavior in the U.S. courts of appeals. This study measures ideology, not by subjec- tively coding the ideological direction of case outcomes, but by determin- ing the degree to which federal appellate judges agree and disagree with their liberal and conservative colleagues at both the appellate and district court levels. Further, through regression analysis, several important find- ings related to the Ideology Scores emerge. First, the Ideology Scores in this Article offer substantial improvements in predicting civil rights case outcomes over the leading measures of ideology. Second, there were very different levels and heterogeneity of ideology among the judges on the studied circuits. Third, the data did not support the conventional wisdom that Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush appointed uniquely ideological judges. Fourth, in general judges appointed by Republican presidents were more ideological than those appointed by Democratic presidents.
    [Show full text]
  • The United States Government Manual 2002/2003
    The United States Government Manual 2002/2003 Office of the Federal Register National Archives and Records Administration VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:14 Aug 24, 2002 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6996 Sfmt 6996 W:\DISC\189864PL.XXX txed01 PsN: txed01 Revised June 1, 2002 Raymond A. Mosley, Director of the Federal Register. John W. Carlin, Archivist of the United States. On the cover: Photograph by Ansel Adams of an unnamed peak in Kings River Canyon, California, circa 1936. From the collection of the National Archives and Records Administration. Ansel Adams (1902-1984) was one of America’s greatest landscape photographers. He is best known for his vistas of the American west and its national parks. His black-and-white photos capture the beauty and vastness of this Nation’s wilderness, as well as its stark simplicity. This year marks the 100th anniversary of his birth. For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–9328 ii VerDate 11-MAY-2000 02:14 Aug 24, 2002 Jkt 010199 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6996 Sfmt 6996 W:\DISC\189864PL.XXX txed01 PsN: txed01 Preface As the official handbook of the Federal Government, The United States Government Manual provides comprehensive information on the agencies of the legislative, judicial, and executive branches. The Manual also includes information on quasi- official agencies; international organizations in which the United States participates; and boards, commissions, and committees. A typical agency description includes a list of principal officials, a summary statement of the agency’s purpose and role in the Federal Government, a brief history of the agency, including its legislative or executive authority, a description of its programs and activities, and a ‘‘Sources of Information’’ section.
    [Show full text]
  • 17-15016 Date Filed: 03/27/2020 Page: 1 of 104
    Case: 17-15016 Date Filed: 03/27/2020 Page: 1 of 104 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 17-15016 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 5:14-mc-00002-MTT MARION E. PITCH, The Personal Representative of the Estate of Anthony S. Pitch, Plaintiff – Appellee, LAURA WEXLER, Intervenor, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant – Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia ________________________ (March 27, 2020) Case: 17-15016 Date Filed: 03/27/2020 Page: 2 of 104 Before ED CARNES, Chief Judge, WILSON, WILLIAM PRYOR, MARTIN, JORDAN, ROSENBAUM, JILL PRYOR, NEWSOM, BRANCH, GRANT, TJOFLAT, and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.* TJOFLAT, Circuit Judge: The grand jury, as an institution, has long been understood as a “constitutional fixture in its own right,” operating independently of any branch of the federal government. United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36, 47, 112 S. Ct. 1735, 1742 (1992) (internal quotation marks omitted). That independence allows the grand jury to serve as a buffer between the government and the people with respect to the enforcement of the criminal law. But the ability of the grand jury to serve this purpose depends upon maintaining the secrecy of its proceedings. The long-established policy of upholding the secrecy of the grand jury helps to protect the innocent accused from facing unfounded charges, encourages full and frank testimony on the part of witnesses, and prevents interference with the grand jury’s deliberations. See Douglas Oil Co. v. Petrol Stops Nw., 441 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Yale Law School 2019–2020
    BULLETIN OF YALE UNIVERSITY BULLETIN OF YALE BULLETIN OF YALE UNIVERSITY Periodicals postage paid New Haven ct 06520-8227 New Haven, Connecticut Yale Law School 2019–2020 Yale Law School Yale 2019–2020 BULLETIN OF YALE UNIVERSITY Series 115 Number 11 August 10, 2019 BULLETIN OF YALE UNIVERSITY Series 115 Number 11 August 10, 2019 (USPS 078-500) The University is committed to basing judgments concerning the admission, education, is published seventeen times a year (one time in May and October; three times in June and employment of individuals upon their qualifications and abilities and a∞rmatively and September; four times in July; five times in August) by Yale University, 2 Whitney seeks to attract to its faculty, sta≠, and student body qualified persons of diverse Avenue, New Haven CT 06510. Periodicals postage paid at New Haven, Connecticut. backgrounds. In accordance with this policy and as delineated by federal and Connecticut law, Yale does not discriminate in admissions, educational programs, or employment Postmaster: Send address changes to Bulletin of Yale University, against any individual on account of that individual’s sex, race, color, religion, age, PO Box 208227, New Haven CT 06520-8227 disability, status as a protected veteran, or national or ethnic origin; nor does Yale discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity or expression. Managing Editor: Kimberly M. Go≠-Crews University policy is committed to a∞rmative action under law in employment of Editor: Lesley K. Baier women, minority group members, individuals with disabilities, and protected veterans. PO Box 208230, New Haven CT 06520-8230 Inquiries concerning these policies may be referred to Valarie Stanley, Director of the O∞ce for Equal Opportunity Programs, 221 Whitney Avenue, 4th Floor, 203.432.0849.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 This Document Contains All Published Opinions Interpreting The
    INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW CLINIC BOALT HALL, SCHOOL OF LAW • ALIEN TORT CLAIMS ACT CASE COMPENDIUM This document contains all published opinions interpreting the Alien Tort Claims Act as of March 2004. It is not meant to be a searchable database but instead to provide a quick review of cases filed, litigated, or adjudicated. Please keep the following in mind when consulting this document: Organization of the Document: Each case is summarized in a separate table that lists: (1) the case name and citation; (2) the name of the presiding judge and, where available, the name of the U.S. President who appointed the judge; (3) a factual summary; (4) the holding of the opinion; e.g. motion to dismiss denied; and (5) the primary reasoning and arguments advanced along with the defenses asserted. We also specifically note the international law norms discussed as well as the analysis of any disputed customary international law norm. Please note that not all cases that survive a motion for summary judgment or dismissal have continued to be litigated and for some cases there was no further public history or data. All cases are organized alphabetically by the name of the first party. If more than one decision is issued in a particular case, we have organized the decisions in chronological order (beginning with the earliest and progressing to the most recent decision). Cases in which multiple opinions have been issued are listed together and include the most recent available status, e.g., on appeal; final judgment entered; or seeking enforcement of final judgment.
    [Show full text]