|
Cayuga Indian Nation Of N.Y. V. Pataki
''Cayuga Indian Nation of New York v. Pataki'', 413 F.3d 266 (2d Cir. 2005), is an important precedent in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit for the litigation of aboriginal title in the United States. Applying the U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling in '' City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York'' (2005), a divided panel held that the equitable doctrine of ''laches'' bars all tribal land claims sounding in ejectment or trespass, for both tribal plaintiffs and the federal government as plaintiff-intervenor. The ruling was the culmination of a two-decade-long litigation in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York before Judge Neal Peters McCurn. Pursuant to a jury verdict, the Cayuga Nation of New York had been awarded $247.9 million, representing the current fair market value and 204 years of rental value damages for 64,015 acres conveyed by the tribe to the state in violation of the Nonintercourse Act (including ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
United States Court Of Appeals For The Second Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (in case citations, 2d Cir.) is one of the thirteen United States Courts of Appeals. Its territory comprises the states of Connecticut, New York and Vermont. The court has appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts: * District of Connecticut * Eastern District of New York * Northern District of New York * Southern District of New York * Western District of New York * District of Vermont The Second Circuit has its clerk's office and hears oral arguments at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse at 40 Foley Square in Lower Manhattan. Due to renovations at that building, from 2006 until early 2013, the court temporarily relocated to the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse across Pearl Street from Foley Square; certain court offices temporarily relocated to the Woolworth Building at 233 Broadway. Because the Second Circuit includes New York City, it has long been one ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Affirmative Defense
An affirmative defense to a civil lawsuit or criminal charge is a fact or set of facts other than those alleged by the plaintiff or prosecutor which, if proven by the defendant, defeats or mitigates the legal consequences of the defendant's otherwise unlawful conduct. In civil lawsuits, affirmative defenses include the statute of limitations, the statute of frauds, waiver, and other affirmative defenses such as, in the United States, those listed in Rule 8 (c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In criminal prosecutions, examples of affirmative defenses are self defense, insanity, entrapment and the statute of limitations. Description In an affirmative defense, the defendant may concede that they committed the alleged acts, but they prove other facts which, under the law, either justify or excuse their otherwise wrongful actions, or otherwise overcomes the plaintiff's claim. In criminal law, an affirmative defense is sometimes called a justification or excuse defense. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Ab Initio
''Ab initio'' ( ) is a Latin term meaning "from the beginning" and is derived from the Latin ''ab'' ("from") + ''initio'', ablative singular of ''initium'' ("beginning"). Etymology Circa 1600, from Latin, literally "from the beginning", from ablative case of ''initium'' "entrance", "beginning", related to verb ''inire'' "to go into", "enter upon", "begin". Uses ''Ab initio'' (abbreviation: ''ab init.'') is used in several contexts, including the following: Law In law, ''ab initio'' refers to something being the case from the start or from the instant of the act rather than from when the court declared it so. For instance, the term "void ''ab initio''" means "to be treated as invalid from the outset." E.g., in many jurisdictions, if a person signs a contract under duress, that contract is treated as being "void ''ab initio''". Typically, documents or acts which are void ''ab initio'' cannot be fixed and if a jurisdiction, a document, or an act is so declared at law to be void ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Daubert Standard
In United States federal law, the ''Daubert'' standard is a rule of evidence regarding the admissibility of expert witness testimony. A party may raise a ''Daubert'' motion, a special motion ''in limine'' raised before or during trial, to exclude the presentation of unqualified evidence to the jury. The ''Daubert'' trilogy are the three United States Supreme Court cases that articulated the ''Daubert'' standard: *'' Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.'' (1993), which held that Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence did not incorporate the ''Frye'' standard as a basis for assessing the admissibility of scientific expert testimony, but that the rule incorporated a flexible reliability standard instead; *''General Electric Co. v. Joiner'' (1997), which held that a district court judge may exclude expert testimony when there are gaps between the evidence relied on by an expert and that person's conclusion, and that an abuse-of-discretion standard of review is the proper ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Infrastructure
Infrastructure is the set of facilities and systems that serve a country, city, or other area, and encompasses the services and facilities necessary for its economy, households and firms to function. Infrastructure is composed of public and private physical structures such as roads, railways, bridges, tunnels, water supply, sewerage, sewers, electrical grids, and telecommunications (including Internet access, Internet connectivity and Broadband, broadband access). In general, infrastructure has been defined as "the physical components of interrelated systems providing Commodity, commodities and services essential to enable, sustain, or enhance societal quality of life, living conditions" and maintain the surrounding environment. Especially in light of the massive societal transformations needed to Climate change mitigation, mitigate and Climate change adaptation, adapt to climate change, contemporary infrastructure conversations frequently focus on sustainable development and gre ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Consideration
Consideration is a concept of English common law and is a necessity for simple contracts but not for special contracts (contracts by deed). The concept has been adopted by other common law jurisdictions. The court in ''Currie v Misa'' declared consideration to be a “Right, Interest, Profit, Benefit, or Forbearance, Detriment, Loss, Responsibility”. Thus, consideration is a promise of something of value given by a promissor in exchange for something of value given by a promisee; and typically the thing of value is goods, money, or an act. Forbearance to act, such as an adult promising to refrain from smoking, is enforceable if one is thereby surrendering a legal right. Consideration may be thought of as the concept of value offered and accepted by people or organisations entering into contracts. Anything of value promised by one party to the other when making a contract can be treated as "consideration": for example, if A contracts to buy a car from B for $5,000, A's c ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Offset (law)
An offset in law, is a reduction in the amount of a judgment granted to a losing party based on debts owed by the prevailing party to the losing party. For example, if an employee successfully sued an employer for wrongful termination, the employer might be entitled to an offset if the employer could demonstrate that it had previously made an overpayment to that employee which had not been returned. A party may similarly be entitled to an offset where it can demonstrate that the prevailing party has already received compensation for its injuries through insurance Insurance is a means of protection from financial loss in which, in exchange for a fee, a party agrees to compensate another party in the event of a certain loss, damage, or injury. It is a form of risk management, primarily used to hedge ..., a judgment against another party liable for those injuries, or some other source. Judgment (law) {{law-stub ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Joint And Several Liability
Where two or more persons are liable in respect of the same liability, in most common law legal systems they may either be: * jointly liable, or * severally liable, or * jointly and severally liable. Joint liability If parties have joint liability, then they are each liable up to the full amount of the relevant obligation. So if a married couple takes a loan from a bank, the loan agreement will normally provide that they are to be "jointly liable" for the full amount. If one party dies, disappears, or is declared bankrupt, the other individual remains fully liable. Accordingly, the bank may sue all living co-promisors for the full amount. However, in suing, the creditor has only one cause of action; i.e., the creditor can sue for each debt only once. If, for example, there are three partners, and the creditor sues all of them for the outstanding loan amount and one of them pays the liability, the creditor cannot recover further amounts from the partners who did not contribute to ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Indian Claims Commission
The Indian Claims Commission was a judicial relations arbiter between the United States federal government and Native American tribes. It was established under the Indian Claims Act of 1946 by the United States Congress to hear any longstanding claims of Indian tribes against the United States. It took until the late 1970s to complete most of them, with the last case finished in the early 21st century. The commission was conceived as way to thank Native Americans for their unprecedented service in World War II and as a way to relieve the anxiety and resentment caused by the United States' history of colonization of indigenous peoples. Together with the law, the Commission created a process for tribes to address their grievances against the United States, and offered monetary compensation for territory lost as a result of broken federal treaties. However, by accepting the government's monetary offer, the aggrieved tribe abdicated any right to raise their claim again in the future. On ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Abatement In Pleading
At common law an abatement in pleading or plea in abatement, was a defence to legal proceedings, which did not contest the principle of the plaintiff A plaintiff ( Π in legal shorthand) is the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an ''action'') before a court. By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy. If this search is successful, the court will issue judgment in favor of t ...'s right to relief, but contended that the plaintiff had made a procedural error, and needed to bring fresh proceedings, which followed the correct procedure. The objection could deal with (among others) place, time, or method of assertion. The plea in abatement was abolished as a particular form of response by the defendant when common-law pleading was replaced by Code Pleading and later by pleading rules, such as the federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Successful assertion of pleas in abatement merely pause proceedings until the problem is remedied. There were two fundamental styles of ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Nonjusticiability
Justiciability concerns the limits upon legal issues over which a court can exercise its judicial authority. It includes, but is not limited to, the legal concept of standing, which is used to determine if the party bringing the suit is a party appropriate to establishing whether an actual adversarial issue exists. Essentially, justiciability seeks to address whether a court possesses the ability to provide adequate resolution of the dispute; where a court believes that it cannot offer such a final determination, the matter is not justiciable. In the United States Federal courts Justiciability is one of several criteria that the United States Supreme Court uses to make a judgment granting ''writ of certiorari'' ("cert."). For an issue to be justiciable by a United States federal court, all of the following conditions must be met: # The parties must not be seeking an advisory opinion. # There must be an actual controversy between the parties, meaning that the parties ca ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
