Related Research Articles
An appellate court, commonly called a court of appeal(s), appeal court, court of second instance or second instance court, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In much of the world, court systems are divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts, often on a discretionary basis. A particular court system's supreme court is its highest appellate court. Appellate courts nationwide can operate under varying rules.
Jurisdiction is the legal term for the legal authority granted to a legal entity to enact justice. In federations like the United States, the concept of jurisdiction applies at multiple levels.
Case law, also used interchangeably with common law, is a law that is based on precedents, that is the judicial decisions from previous cases, rather than law based on constitutions, statutes, or regulations. Case law uses the detailed facts of a legal case that have been resolved by courts or similar tribunals. These past decisions are called "case law", or precedent. Stare decisis—a Latin phrase meaning "let the decision stand"—is the principle by which judges are bound to such past decisions, drawing on established judicial authority to formulate their positions.
The Court of Cassation is the supreme court for civil and criminal cases in France. It is one of the country's four apex courts, along with the Council of State, the Constitutional Council and the Jurisdictional Disputes Tribunal.
A vacated judgment legally voids a previous legal judgment. A vacated judgment is usually the result of the judgment of an appellate court, which overturns, reverses, or sets aside the judgment of a lower court. An appellate court may also vacate its own decisions. Rules of procedure may allow vacatur either at the request of a party or sua sponte.
In law, motu proprio describes an official act taken without a formal request from another party. Some jurisdictions use the term sua sponte for the same concept.
The Supreme Court of Pakistan is the apex court in the judicial hierarchy of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Remand is when higher courts send cases back to lower courts for further action. In the law of the United States, appellate courts remand cases to district courts for actions such as a new trial. Federal appellate courts, including the Supreme Court, have the power to "remand [a] cause and ... require such further proceedings to be had as may be just under the circumstances." This includes the power to make summary "grant, vacate and remand" (GVR) orders.
Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry is a Pakistani jurist who served as the 20th Chief Justice of Pakistan over three non-consecutive terms from 29 June 2005 to 11 December 2013.
Judicial disqualification, also referred to as recusal, is the act of abstaining from participation in an official action such as a legal proceeding due to a conflict of interest of the presiding court official or administrative officer. Applicable statutes or canons of ethics may provide standards for recusal in a given proceeding or matter. Providing that the judge or presiding officer must be free from disabling conflicts of interest makes the fairness of the proceedings less likely to be questioned.
Muntaqim v. Coombe, 449 F.3d 371, was a legal challenge to New York State’s law disenfranchising individuals convicted of felonies while in prison and on parole. The plaintiff, Jalil Abdul Muntaqim who was serving a life sentence at the time, argued that the law had a disproportionate impact on African Americans and therefore violated Section 2 of the federal Voting Rights Act as a denial of the right to vote on account of race.
Day v. McDonough, 547 U.S. 198 (2006), is a US Supreme Court case involving the one-year statute of limitations for filing habeas corpus petitions that was established by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). In a 5–4 decision, the Court ruled that if the government unintentionally failed to object to the filing of a petition after the AEDPA limitations period has expired, it is not an abuse of discretion for a district court to dismiss sua sponte the petition on that basis.
The Montana Supreme Court is the highest court of the state court system in the U.S. state of Montana. It is established and its powers defined by Article VII of the 1972 Montana Constitution. It is primarily an appellate court which reviews civil and criminal decisions of Montana's trial courts of general jurisdiction and certain specialized legislative courts, only having original jurisdiction in a limited number of actions. The court's Chief Justice and six Associate Justices are elected by non-partisan, popular elections. The Montana Supreme Court meets in the Joseph P. Mazurek Building in Helena, Montana, the state's capital, an international style building completed in 1982 and named in the honor of former Montana Attorney General, Joseph P. Mazurek.
Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007), is a Supreme Court of the United States case in which the Court determined that the federal courts of appeals lack jurisdiction to hear habeas appeals that are filed late, even if the district court said the petitioner had additional time to file.
Greenlaw v. United States, 554 U.S. 237 (2008), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a federal appeals court may not sua sponte increase a defendant's sentence unless the government first files a notice of appeal.
Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick, 559 U.S. 154 (2010), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States involving copyright law. The Court held that failure to register a copyright under Section 411 (a) of the United States Copyright Act does not limit a Federal Court's jurisdiction over claims of infringement regarding unregistered works.
United States v. More, 7 U.S. 159 (1805), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that it had no jurisdiction to hear appeals from criminal cases in the circuit courts by writs of error. Relying on the Exceptions Clause, More held that Congress's enumerated grants of appellate jurisdiction to the Court operated as an exercise of Congress's power to eliminate all other forms of appellate jurisdiction.
An in-chambers opinion is an opinion by a single justice or judge of a multi-member appellate court, rendered on an issue that the court's rules or procedures allow a single member of the court to decide. The judge is said to decide the matter "in chambers" because the decision can be issued from the judge's chambers without a formal court proceeding.
Reyes Mata v. Lynch, 576 U.S. 143 (2015), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that the federal courts of appeals have jurisdiction to review the orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals to reject motions to reopen.
A political and constitutional crisis emerged in Pakistan from, 3 April 2022 to 10 April 2022 when, National Assembly's Deputy Speaker Qasim Khan Suri dismissed a no-confidence motion against Prime Minister Imran Khan during a session in which it was expected to be taken up for a vote, alleging that a foreign country's involvement in the regime change was contradictory to Article 5 of the Constitution of Pakistan. Moments later, Khan stated in a televised address that he had advised President Arif Alvi to dissolve the National Assembly. Alvi complied with Khan's advice under Article 58 of the constitution. This resulted in the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SCP) taking a suo motu notice of the ongoing situation, creating a constitutional crisis, as effectively, Imran Khan led a constitutional coup. Four days later, the SCP ruled that the dismissal of the no-confidence motion, the prorogation of the National Assembly, the advice from Imran Khan to President Arif Alvi to dissolve the National Assembly, and the subsequent dissolution of the National Assembly were unconstitutional, and overturned these actions in a 5-0 vote. The Supreme Court further held that the National Assembly had not been prorogued and had to be reconvened by the speaker immediately and no later than 10:30 a.m. on 9 April 2022.
References
- ↑ Castaldo, Jennifer S. (2015-03-13). "Civil Litigation: Obtaining appellate review of a sua sponte order". NY Daily Record. Retrieved 2021-08-30.
- ↑ Milani, Adam A.; Smith, Michael R. (2001). "Playing God: A Critical Look at Sua Sponte Decisions by Appellate Courts". Tennessee Law Review. 69: 245.
- ↑ Couch, Dick (2013-07-02). Sua Sponte: The Forging of a Modern American Ranger. Penguin. ISBN 978-0-425-25360-1.
- ↑ Shannon, Bradley (March 2018). "Reconciling Subject-Matter Jurisdiction". Hofstra Law Review. 46 (3).
- ↑ Abramson, Leslie W. (2007). "Judicial Disclosure and Disqualification: The Need for More Guidance". Justice System Journal. 28 (3): 301–308. doi:10.1080/0098261X.2007.10767849. JSTOR 27977352. S2CID 141823072.
- ↑ Carlisle v. United States , 517U.S.416 ( Supreme Court of the United States 1996).
- ↑ Trest v. Cain, 522U.S.87 ( Supreme Court of the United States 1997).
- ↑ Karachi violence suo motu: Supreme Court to resume proceedings from today – The Express Tribune
- ↑ SC reserves verdict in POL GST suo motu case | Pakistan Today | Latest news | Breaking news | Pakistan News | World news | Business | Sport and Multimedia
- ↑ Pakistan court takes suo motu notice of Hazara killings – The Hindu
- ↑ Daily Times – Leading News Resource of Pakistan
- ↑ Pak`s CJ takes suo motu notice of illegal CNG licences
- ↑ The power of suo motu – The Express Tribune
- ↑ "US Army Rangers". US Army Ranger Association. Retrieved 29 March 2015.