court of appeals


Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Acronyms, Wikipedia.

court of appeals

n. any court (state or federal) which hears appeals from judgments and rulings of trial courts or lower appeals courts. (See: court)

References in periodicals archive ?
Despite the uninterrupted guidance from this Court that the States are not powerless to create incentives to local activities, the Court of Appeals muddled Commerce Clause jurisprudence, potentially leaving every state tax incentive vulnerable to challenge.
The Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed this decision, but asked the Court of Appeals to decide whether the recalcitrant worker defense applied.
The court of appeals judgment was vacated and the case remanded for further proceedings.
The bill also would expand the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to review decisions of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, a crucial right long sought by the DAV.
In light of Polaroid, the North Carolina Supreme Court ordered the state court of appeals to reconsider its nonbusiness income holding in Union Carbide Corp.
I think they appropriately considered her age and circumstances of giving the statement,'' Wood said of the Arizona Court of Appeals ruling.
As a result of last year's Court of Appeals decision, MFS has had tariffs on file with the FCC for its interstate services for almost a year," said Andrew D.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismissed a federal challenge against the City of San Diego determining that legal challenge was moot since the federal government now owns the land on which the monument sits.
Both the Tribunal and Court of Appeals ignored the Michigan Court of Appeals decision in University of Michigan, Board of Regents v Michigan Department of Treasury, 217 Mich.
On appeal, however, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reviewed each factor used to justify the stop in isolation from the others and concluded that a majority of them were susceptible to innocent explanation and, therefore, carried "little or no weight in the reasonable-suspicion calculus.
On further appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division, stating that "local zoning boards have broad discretion in considering applications for variances, and judicial review is limited to determining whether the action taken by the board was illegal, arbitrary or an abuse of discretion (citation omitted.
Srivastava (7-19-00, aff'g in part, rev'g and remd'g in part, TC Memo 1998-362), the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a contingent fee paid under Texas law was excludible from the plaintiff's income.