EFTA00028903Set 8
2021-01-1122p6,173w
Kawashima v. Holder,
565 U.S. 478 (2012) 11
Landgraf v. USI Film Products,
511 U.S. 244 (1994) passim
Leocal v. Ashcroft,
543 U.S. 1 (2004) 11
Martin v. Hadix ... intent under the two-step framework required by Landgraf v. US! Film Products,
511 U.S. 244 (1994)—and to even mention Congress' explicit rejection of a retroactivity
provision
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%208/EFTA00028903.pdf
EFTA00285631Set 9
2018-08-0770p17,816w
papers for a different proposition, but it's found at 511
14 U.S. 244.
15 In that case, your Honor, the U.S. Supreme Court was
16 considering a very similar ... citing Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244,
11 (1994)). Therefore, the defendants conclude that the
12 plaintiff's claims are plainly time-barred.
13 The defendants rely
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00285631.pdf
EFTA00103709Set 9
2018-08-0925p6,523w
Kawashima v. Holder,
565 U.S. 478 (2012) 13
Landgraf v. USI Film Prod.,
511 U.S. 244 (1994) passim
Lattab v. Ashcroft,
384 F.3d 8 (1st Cir. 2004) 7
Leocal ... legislation" that is "deeply rooted in our jurisprudence." Landgraf v. USI Film Prod.,
511 U.S. 244, 265 (1994) (emphasis added). "Tillie principle that the legal effect of conduct
should ordinarily
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00103709.pdf
EFTA01099901Set 9
2006-07-2631p10,619w
eloquently stated in Landgraf v. USI Film
Products, 114 S.Ct. 1483, 1497, 511 U.S. 244, 265-66 (1994):
... the presumption against retroactive legislation is deeply rooted in our
jurisprudence ... provided by the United States Supreme Court in
Landgraf v. US1 Film Product% 511 U.S. 244, 114 S.Ct. 1483 (1994), pertaining to civil
statutes, not only is there no express
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01099901.pdf
EFTA00207677Set 9
2006-07-2636p12,694w
eloquently stated in Landgraf v. USI Film
Products, 114 S.Ct. 1483, 1497, 511 U.S. 244, 265-66 (1994):
... the presumption against retroactive legislation is deeply rooted in our
jurisprudence ... provided by the United States Supreme Court in
Landgraf v. USI Film Products 511 U.S. 244, 114 S.Ct. 1483 (1994), pertaining to civil
statutes, not only is there no express
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00207677.pdf
EFTA01099943Set 9
2006-07-2632p10,791w
eloquently stated in Landgraf v. USI Film
Products, 114 S.Ct. 1483, 1497, 511 U.S. 244, 265-66 (1994):
... the presumption against retroactive legislation is deeply rooted in our
jurisprudence ... provided by the United Stales Supreme Court in
Landgraf v. USI Film Product% 511 U.S. 244, 114 S.Ct. 1483 (1994), pertaining to civil
statutes, not only is there no express
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01099943.pdf
EFTA01100005Set 9
2006-07-2643p14,726w
eloquently stated in Landgraf v. USI Film
Products 114 S.Ct. 1483, 1497, 511 U.S. 244, 265-66 (1994):
... the presumption against retroactive legislation is deeply rooted in our
jurisprudence ... United States Supreme Court in
Landv,raf v. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244, 114 S.Ct. 1483 (1994), pertaining to civil
statutes, not only is there no express intent
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA01100005.pdf
EFTA00207722Set 9
2010-03-2929p9,495w
eloquently stated in Landgraf v. USI Film
Products, 114 S.Ct. 1483, 1497, 511 U.S. 244, 265-66 (1994):
... the presumption against retroactive legislation is deeply rooted in our
jurisprudence ... provided by the United States Supreme Court in
Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244, 114 S.Ct. 1483 (1994), pertaining to civil
statutes, not only is there no express
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00207722.pdf
EFTA00213246Set 9
2010-03-2929p9,525w
eloquently stated in Landgraf v. USI Film
Products, 114 S.Ct. 1483, 1497, 511 U.S. 244, 265-66 (1994):
... the presumption against retroactive legislation is deeply rooted in our
jurisprudence ... provided by the United States Supreme Court in
Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244, 114 S.Ct. 1483 (1994), pertaining to civil
statutes, not only is there no express
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00213246.pdf
EFTA00102999Set 9
2019-03-26239p78,398w
United States,
485 U.S. 759 (1988) 222
Landgraf v. USI Film Products,
511 U.S. 244 (1994) 35,36,41,42
Leocal v. Ashcroft,
543 U.S. 1 (2004) 56, 57
Madanes
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00102999.pdf
EFTA00222842Set 9
2009-05-2220p7,114w
Similarly, in the companion case of Landgraf I. Usi Film Prods., 511 U.S. 244, 275, n. 28
(1994), the Court declined to retroactively apply substantive changes to Title VII cases
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00222842.pdf
EFTA00731177Set 9
2010-09-243p876w
cases within the jurisdiction of the state"); EEOC v. Arabian American Oil
Co., 499 U.S. 244, 249-251, Ill S.Ct. 1227, 113 L.Ed.2d 274 (1991). That presumption
would apply
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00731177.pdf
EFTA00611590Set 9
2010-04-1310p2,663w
United States Supreme Court case of
Landgraf v. IJSI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244, 280, (1994), as a landmark decision in
determining whether or not a statute violates constitutional principles
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%209/EFTA00611590.pdf