Administrative Law. Right to Expeditious Hearing. District Court May Enjoin Implementation of NLRB Remand Order Where Unreasonable Delay Would Result. Deering Milliken, Inc. v. Johnston (4th Cir. 1961)

1962 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 401 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Administrative Law ◽  
District Court

scholarly journals What exactly did the judge decide? Clear language and well-arranged structure lead to better comprehensible court judgments

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 248-260
Author(s):  
Marieke Geerlings ◽  
André van Montfort
Keyword(s):  
Administrative Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
Original Version ◽  
District Court ◽  
Plausible Assumption ◽  
Quality Requirements ◽  
Structure Lead ◽  
Digital Survey ◽  
Better Than

In recent years, judicial authorities in the Netherlands have started paying more and more attention to the linguistic and textual quality of their judgments. This is based on the assumption that a better linguistic and textual quality of court judgments leads to the content of these judgments being better understood by citizens and private or public organizations. However, to what extent is this plausible assumption empirically correct? To answer this question, an original administrative law judgment from a Dutch district court was rewritten on the basis of a number of linguistic and textual quality requirements from the literature. Subsequently, a digital survey was conducted among 106 respondents. Half of the respondents answered a number of substantive questions about the original version of the court judgment. The other half of the respondents answered the same substantive questions about the rewritten version. According to the answers to the substantive questions, the second group of respondents understood the content of the court judgment considerably better than those to whom the original version of the court judgment was presented. The higher linguistic and textual quality of the rewritten version ensured that the content of the court judgment was better understood.

scholarly journals PENDAFTARAN HAK ATAS TANAH BERDASARKAN PUTUSAN PENGADILAN

FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Danar Fiscusia Kurniaji
Keyword(s):  
Research Result ◽  
Lexical Ambiguity ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
District Court ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
Land Register

AbstractLand registration law by the court judgement often faced some implementation issues, it happens because there are unsynchronized regulations of land register based on court judgement (PP 24/1997 and PerkaBPN No.3/2011) and it tends to be lexical ambiguity (even potentially inexcusable) for example the Kalianda district court judgement No.16/Pdt/G/2008/PN. KLD between PT. Saburai Utama to Basais Sutami and Sugan Sukiandjojo. The research result shows that only the final judgement (inkracht van gewijsde) and synchronise court judgement toward of the same object can be registered as land right registry, especially the condemn judgement (condemnation) by the district court. District court judgements needs to authorize offices interpretation about procedure to take (publishing, transferring, and/or cancelling land right) and which basic law should be used (PP No. 24/1997 or PerkaBPN No. 3/2011) to implementing land right registration, while administrative law court is being simpler, because it only focusing about cancellation followed by certificate publishing. Keywords: Land Register, Court JudgementAbstrakHukum pendaftaran Tanah dengan putusan pengadilan yang sering dihadapi beberapa masalah pelaksanaan, hal itu terjadi karena ada peraturan pendaftaran tanah yang tidak sinkron berdasarkan putusan pengadilan (PP 24/1997 dan PerkaBPN No.3/2011) dan itu cenderung menjadi ambiguitas leksikal (bahkan berpotensi dimaafkan) misalnya putusan pengadilan Kabupaten Kalianda No.16/Pdt/G/2008/PN.KLD antara PT. Saburai Utama terhadap Basais Sutami dan Sugan Sukiandjojo. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa hanya putusan terakhir (inkracht van gewijsde) dan sinkronisasi keputusan pengadilan terhadap objek yang sama dapat didaftarkan sebagai pendaftaran hak atas tanah, terutama pertimbangan putusan (hukuman) oleh pengadilan kabupaten. keputusan pengadilan kabupaten perlu otorisasi kantor penafsiran tentang prosedur untuk mengambil (penerbitan, memindahkan, dan/atau membatalkan tanah kanan) dan yang menjadi dasar hukum harus digunakan (PP No. 24/1997 atau PerkaBPN No. 3/2011) untuk melaksanakan hak atas tanah pendaftaran, sementara pengadilan hukum administrasi yang lebih sederhana, karena hanya berfokus tentang pembatalan diikuti oleh penerbitan sertifikat. Kata Kunci: Pendaftaran Tanah, Putusan Pengadilan

Medicaid & Medicare: D.C. Appellate Court Denies Claim for Medicare Reimbursement of GME Cost

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-205
Author(s):  
choeffel Amy
Keyword(s):  
Medical Center ◽  
Federal District ◽  
Federal Court ◽  
University Of Pennsylvania ◽  
District Court ◽  
Appellate Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Administrative Proceedings ◽  
Summary Judgment

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld, in Presbyterian Medical Center of the University of Pennsylvania Health System v. Shalala, 170 F.3d 1146 (D.C. Cir. 1999), a federal district court ruling granting summary judgment to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) in a case in which Presbyterian Medical Center (PMC) challenged Medicare's requirement of contemporaneous documentation of $828,000 in graduate medical education (GME) expenses prior to increasing reimbursement amounts. DHHS Secretary Donna Shalala denied PMC's request for reimbursement for increased GME costs. The appellants then brought suit in federal court challenging the legality of an interpretative rule that requires requested increases in reimbursement to be supported by contemporaneous documentation. PMC also alleged that an error was made in the administrative proceedings to prejudice its claims because Aetna, the hospital's fiscal intermediary, failed to provide the hospital with a written report explaining why it was denied the GME reimbursement.

Privacy: Users of Pharmaceutical Websites

2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 466-474
Keyword(s):  
Personal Information ◽  
District Court ◽  
Traffic Data ◽  
Web Traffic ◽  
Electronic Communications ◽  
Private Action

In In re Pharmatrak, Inc. Privacy Litigation, website users brought suit claiming that major pharmaceutical corporations and a web monitoring company violated three federal statutes protecting electronic communications and data by collecting web traffic data and personal information about website users. On August 13,2002, the District Court of Massachusetts dismissed these allegations, holding that the defendants were parties to the communications and thus exempted under the statutory language.The court also found that plaintiffs had not suffered an amount of damages required to sustain private action.

From meditation to action – a research agenda for studying informal global rule-making: remarks on ‘Cosmopolitanism, publicity, and the emergence of a “global administrative law”’

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Oliver Westerwinter
Keyword(s):  
Global Governance ◽  
Comparative Research ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
Institutional Architecture ◽  
Global Law ◽  
Rule Making ◽  
Law Making

Abstract Friedrich Kratochwil engages critically with the emergence of a global administrative law and its consequences for the democratic legitimacy of global governance. While he makes important contributions to our understanding of global governance, he does not sufficiently discuss the differences in the institutional design of new forms of global law-making and their consequences for the effectiveness and legitimacy of global governance. I elaborate on these limitations and outline a comparative research agenda on the emergence, design, and effectiveness of the diverse arrangements that constitute the complex institutional architecture of contemporary global governance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document