Justice Clarence Thomas made headlines when he broke his self-imposed code of silence during oral arguments in January. But apparently, he was unaware of the buzz his rare remark created. When a student asked Justice Thomas, who was speaking this week at Duquesne University, what he thought of the media’s attention to his broken silence, Justice Thomas said […]
Brace yourselves: The simmering mystery over the words Justice Clarence Thomas used to break his nearly seven-year silence during oral arguments has been solved! The U.S. Supreme Court has published the final — and revised – transcript from oral arguments in the ineffective assistance case Boyer v. Louisiana revealing the joke Justice Thomas cracked in […]
Sometimes U.S. Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer give new meaning to the term “oral argument.” During the first week of arguments in the recently concluded term, for example, the justices considered whether the Confrontation Clause ...
ST. LOUIS — Oral arguments usually get most of the attention when cases make it to the U.S. Supreme Court, but Justice Samuel Alito said those arguments are a relatively small part of deciding each case. Justice Alito, 61, spoke this week at a Law Day gathering ...
Despite the disturbing facts underlying the case Camreta v. Greene, oral arguments at the Supreme Court this week were a barrel of laughs, care of Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia.
Oral arguments at the U.S. Supreme Court can be uncomfortable for the lawyers that argue before the justices. But this week it was a justice who was experiencing some discomfort.
It was an anniversary of sorts for the U.S. Supreme Court: The last time Justice Clarence Thomas made a comment or asked a question during oral arguments at the Court was Feb. 22, 2006, five years ago.
During lively oral arguments in a case that could have implications far beyond the securities fraud sphere, the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court tried to determine just what constitutes material information that should be disclosed to shareholders.
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that will decide what notice credit card companies must give to consumers about interest rate increases under a now-changed federal regulation.
- Fourth Department – Negligent performance: Rosenthal v. Syracuse University, et al.
- Second Circuit – Visual Artists Rights Act: Kerson v. Vermont Law School Inc.
- NYS Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics – Former foreclosure referee: Opinion 22-157
- NYS Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics – College honorarium: Opinion 22-156
- Second Circuit – Reasonable accommodation: Tafolla v. Heilig
- Fourth Department – Labor Law: Primisch v. Peroxychem LLC
- NYS Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics – Judicial candidacy: Opinion 22-155
- Fourth Department – Defamation: Lavine v. Glavin
- NYS Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics – Law clerk: Opinion 22-154
- NYS Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics – Review of another judge’s actions: Opinion 22-153
- NYS Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics – Charitable contributions: Opinion 22-150
- Second Circuit – Class action settlement: Moses v. The New York Times Company
- Appeals court upholds conviction
- Federal lawsuit reinstated against jail officer over strip search, delayed release
- Hyzon to pay $25M penalty to settle alleged fraud charges by SEC
- NY appeals court reinstates lawsuit over contract to remove snow
- Fourth Department affirms $400K judgment in contract dispute
- Fourth Department affirms decision in NY property dispute
- Greenlight Networks selects Buffalo-based attorney as general counsel
- Barclay Damon hires attorney Matt Smith