Forget your password? Don't worry.
×Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.
United States Supreme Court | 398 U.S. 144 (1970)
In a motion for summary judgment, the moving party has the burden of showing the absence of a genuine issue as to any material fact.
Ahern v. Scholz
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit | 85 F.3d 774 (1st Cir. 1996)
A verdict may be set aside and a new trial ordered when the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence.
Arnstein v. Porter
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit | 154 F.2d 464 (1946)
Summary judgment is inappropriate when a case’s resolution depends on the credibility given to a particular witness’s testimony.
Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court
United States Supreme Court | 480 U.S. 102 (1987)
A foreign business' mere awareness that its products or services provided outside the United States would reach a forum state within the United States in the stream of commerce does not satisfy the minimum contacts needed to exercise jurisdiction over that foreign business.
Band's Refuse Removal, Inc. v. Borough of Fair Lawn
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division | 163 A.2d 465 (N.J. Super. 1960)
A judge may take an active part in the trial of a case, but this power must be exercised with the greatest restraint, not only maintaining impartiality, but the appearance of impartiality.
Bates v. C & S Adjusters, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit | 980 F.2d 865 (2d Cir. 1992)
Venue is proper where a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred.
Beacon Theaters, Inc. v. Westover
United States Supreme Court | 359 U.S. 500 (1959)
When legal and equitable issues exist in the same trial, the legal issues must be first resolved by a jury before the equitable issues may be resolved by the judge.
Bell Atlantic v. Twombly
United States Supreme Court | 550 U.S. 544 (2007)
To state a claim under § 1 of the Sherman Act, the complaint must contain enough factual material to suggest that an agreement existed between the defendants.
Bose Corporation v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc.
United States Supreme Court | 466 U.S. 485 (1984)
In cases in which there is a claim of denial of rights under the Federal Constitution, courts of appeals are not bound by the conclusions of lower courts, but will make an independent examination of the whole record in order to re-examine the evidentiary basis on which those conclusions are founded.
Bowles v. Russell
United States Supreme Court | 551 U.S. 205 (2007)
A court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal filed after the statutory period but within the period allowed by the district court’s order.
Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz
United States Supreme Court | 471 U.S. 462 (1985)
When determining if a defendant satisfies the minimum contacts requirement for personal jurisdiction, the court must look to the purposefully directed activities of the defendant toward the forum state and whether the harm arising or relating to those activities are the cause of the litigation.
Burlington Northern Railroad Co. v. Woods
United States Supreme Court | 480 U.S. 1 (1987)
A federal rule that can be at least reasonably classified as procedural will preempt a state rule where the purposes of the rules are so similar that the federal rule can be said to occupy the state rule’s field of operation.
Burnham v. Superior Court
United States Supreme Court | 495 U.S. 604 (1990)
A non-resident is properly served if he is physically present in the forum state, and the forum state may exercise personal jurisdiction over him without violating due process.
Byrd v. Blue Ridge Rural Electric Cooperative
United States Supreme Court | 356 U.S. 525 (1958)
The federal policy of having the jury answer questions of fact prevails over state rules that would interrupt the judge-jury relationship in federal court.
Calder v. Jones
United States Supreme Court | 465 U.S. 783 (1984)
Personal jurisdiction is proper over a defendant where the defendant has certain minimum contacts such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
Carey v. Piphus
United States Supreme Court | 435 U.S. 247 (1978)
In an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for the deprivation of procedural due process, the plaintiff must prove that he actually was injured by the deprivation before he may recover more than nominal damages.
Carson v. American Brands, Inc.
United States Supreme Court | 450 U.S. 79 (1981)
An interlocutory order of the district court denying a joint motion of the parties to enter into a consent decree containing injunctive relief is an appealable order.
Castano v. American Tobacco Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit | 84 F.3d 734 (1996)
The complexity and novelty of a particular class action can be sufficient to revoke class certification.
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
United States Supreme Court | 477 U.S. 317 (1986)
A party making a motion for summary judgment does not need to provide affirmative evidence in the form of affidavits to support its motion.
Chauffeurs, Teamsters and Helpers, Local No. 391 v. Terry
United States Supreme Court | 494 U.S. 558 (1990)
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.
