remand

(redirected from remands)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.

Remand

To send back.

A higher court may remand a case to a lower court so that the lower court will take a certain action ordered by the higher court. A prisoner who is remanded into custody is sent back to prison subsequent to a Preliminary Hearing before a tribunal or magistrate until the hearing is resumed, or the trial is commenced.

remand

v. to send back. An appeals court may remand a case to the trial court for further action if it reverses the judgment of the lower court, or after a preliminary hearing a judge may remand into custody a person accused of a crime if the judge finds that a there is reason to hold the accused for trial. (See: appeal, preliminary hearing)

remand

verb command back, commit, commit to an institution, consign, delegate, entrust, imprison again, order back, reassign, recommit, reincarcerate, relegate, remit, remittere, replace, restore, return, reeurn to prison, send, send back, transfer
Associated concepts: general remand, reversed and reeanded
See also: bondage, confine, constraint, detain, imprisonment, recommit, relegate, remit

remand

the disposal of an accused person during further process of law. A person may be remanded on bail or in custody. Now includes non-secure remand, the principal example being ELECTRONIC TAGGING.

TO REMAND. To send back or recommit. When a prisoner is brought before a judge on a habeas corpus, for the purpose of obtaining his liberty, the judge hears the case, and either discharges him or not; when there is cause for his detention, he remands him.

References in periodicals archive ?
True, no appeal lies from the order of remand; but in logic and in fact the decree of dismissal preceded that of remand and was made by the District Court while it had control of the cause.
The Waco doctrine has allowed appellate courts to review district court orders that lead to, but are separate from, orders oo remand and have a conclusive effect upon the ensuing state court action.
706, 712 (1996), finding appellate review not barred under [section] 1447(4) and then asking whether an abstention-based remand was reviewable under [section] 1291, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the rule of finality and the "collateral order" exception: (10)
The 11th Circuit has made sense out of this seeming incongruity between the "matter of substantive law" doctrine under Waco (concerning nonfinal orders) and the [section] 1447(d) limitations (concerning remand orders) by explaining:
Unlike the "matter of substantive law exception" to section 1447(d), which allows courts of appeals to review only those remand orders that are based on substantive determinations of law, the Waco doctrine allows us to review a district court's jurisdictional determinations.
The court found the Waco doctrine did not apply to the district court decision to remand: "the substantive issue [wa]s intrinsic to the district court's decision to remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Thus, they trigger remand under [section] 1447(c) of any remaining state law claims for lack of jurisdiction; further, that decision to remand, by virtue of being within the scope of [section] 1447(c) and, therefore, deemed wholly non-reviewable, will likely remain unreviewable by operation of [section] 1447(d).
Before weighing appellate review of an ERISA remand order, however, a litigant opposing a district court remand order should consider, in conjunction with appellate counsel, the type of review sought and the issues surrounding finality.
Even if a remand order falls within [section] 1447(c)'s purview and is non-reviewable, there may be other means for review (or its practical equivalent).