U.S. Courts of Appeals

Displaying 81 - 90 of 141, sorted by most recent

form.antibot { display: none !important; } You must have JavaScript enabled to use this form.

Case Commentary: Lops v. Lops, 140 F.3d 927 (11th Cir. 1998)

James D. Garbolino

January 20, 2016

Abstention | Child Well Settled | Equitable Estoppel | Delay

Case Commentary: Mendez v. May, 778 F.3d 337 (1st Cir. 2015)

James D. Garbolino

January 20, 2016

Habitual Residence

Facts

Case Commentary: E.R.S.C. v. Carlwig (In re A.L.C.), 607 Fed. Appx. 658 (9th Cir. 2015)

James D. Garbolino

January 20, 2016

Habitual Residence

Facts

Case Commentary: Karkkainen v. Kovalchuk, 445 F.3d 280 (3d Cir. 2006)

James D. Garbolino

January 20, 2016

Habitual Residence

Case Commentary: Barzilay v. Barzilay (Barzilay I), 536 F.3d 844 (8th Cir. 2008), & Barzilay v. Barzilay (Barzilay II), 600 F.3d 912 (8th Cir. 2010)

James D. Garbolino

January 19, 2016

Abstention | Habitual Residence

Case Commentary: Bader v. Kramer (Bader I), 445 F.3d 346 (4th Cir. 2006), & Bader v. Kramer (Bader II), 484 F.3d 666 (4th Cir. 2007)

James D. Garbolino

January 19, 2016

Rights of Custody

Case Commentary: Smedley v. Smedley, 772 F.3d 184 (4th Cir. 2014)

James D. Garbolino

January 19, 2016

Comity

Facts

Case Commentary: Mauvais v. Herisse, 772 F.3d 6 (1st Cir. 2014)

James D. Garbolino

January 19, 2016

Habitual Residence | Acclimatization | Grave Risk

Facts

Comparative Study of the Taxation of Costs in the Circuit Courts of Appeals Under Rule 39 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure: Report to the Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules of the Judicial Conference of the United States

Marie Leary

April 1, 2011

The Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules requested this report on circuit practices for awarding costs under Rule 39 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Circuit CJA Case-Budgeting Attorney Pilot Project Evaluation (2007–2009) Appendix

Margaret S. Williams

December 20, 2010

During the period January through April of 2007, a case-budgeting attorney (CBA) was hired in each of the Second, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits as part of the Case-Budgeting Attorney Pilot Project authorized by the Judicial

Federal Judicial Center

You are here

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Case Commentary: Lops v. Lops, 140 F.3d 927 (11th Cir. 1998)

Case Commentary: Mendez v. May, 778 F.3d 337 (1st Cir. 2015)

Case Commentary: E.R.S.C. v. Carlwig (In re A.L.C.), 607 Fed. Appx. 658 (9th Cir. 2015)

Case Commentary: Karkkainen v. Kovalchuk, 445 F.3d 280 (3d Cir. 2006)

Case Commentary: Barzilay v. Barzilay (Barzilay I), 536 F.3d 844 (8th Cir. 2008), & Barzilay v. Barzilay (Barzilay II), 600 F.3d 912 (8th Cir. 2010)

Case Commentary: Bader v. Kramer (Bader I), 445 F.3d 346 (4th Cir. 2006), & Bader v. Kramer (Bader II), 484 F.3d 666 (4th Cir. 2007)

Case Commentary: Smedley v. Smedley, 772 F.3d 184 (4th Cir. 2014)

Case Commentary: Mauvais v. Herisse, 772 F.3d 6 (1st Cir. 2014)

Comparative Study of the Taxation of Costs in the Circuit Courts of Appeals Under Rule 39 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure: Report to the Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules of the Judicial Conference of the United States

Circuit CJA Case-Budgeting Attorney Pilot Project Evaluation (2007–2009) Appendix

Pages