Hall v. Hall
When consolidated under FRCP 42(a), cases retain their distinct identities such that when a final judgment is rendered in one, it confers upon the losing party the immediate right of appeal, regardless of whether any of the other consolidated cases remains unresolved.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Ayestas v. Davis
A funding request under 18 U.S.C. §3599(f) requires the funding applicant to show that a reasonable attorney would regard the services as sufficiently important.
Area(s) of Law:- Habeas Corpus
Marinello v. United States
To convict under 26 U. S. C. §7212(a), the finder of fact must determine that the defendant had knowledge of a particular proceeding or could have reasonably foreseen that a particular proceeding would commence.
Area(s) of Law:- Tax Law
Cyan, Inc. v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund
SLUSA’s amendment to the Securities Act of 1933 does not deprive state courts of jurisdiction over class actions only alleging violations of the 1933 Act and does not affect the 1933 Act’s removal ban.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Texas v. New Mexico
The United States may intervene in a lawsuit between to defend its “distinctively federal interests,” where various factors collectively persuade the Court to permit such intervention.
Area(s) of Law:- Water Rights
U.S. Bank N.A. v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC
A designation of "non-statutory insider" status on an individual for purposes of Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings requires findings of basic or historical fact which are appropriately reviewed for clear error.
Area(s) of Law:- Bankruptcy Law