Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Sorted by: recent Court: us supreme court Year: 2006 Page 1 of about 37 results (0.095 seconds)

Dec 11 2006 (FN)

Bp America Production Co. Vs. Burton

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Dec-11-2006

..... states , 345 u. s. 59 , 66. the phrase action for money damages reinforces this reading because the term damages is generally used to mean pecuniary compensation or indemnity recovered in court. moreover, the fact that 2415(a) distinguishes between judicial and administrative proceedings by providing that an action must commence within one year after final decisions have ..... the farm credit administration); 10 cfr pt. 820, app. a, ix b (2006) ( administrative actions, such as determination of award fees where [department of energy] contracts provide for such determinations, will be considered separately from any civil penalties that may be imposed under this enforcement policy ). footnote 6 there was some question at oral argument whether ..... the complaint is filed within six years after the right of action accrues or within one year after final decisions have been rendered in applicable administrative proceedings required by contract or by law, whichever is later. (emphasis added.) whether this general 6-year statute of limitations also governs mms administrative payment orders concerning pre-september 1, 1996 ..... , referring to an administrative action, a civil or administrative action, or administrative enforcement actions. section 2415(a) s references to every action for money damages founded upon any contract (emphasis added) do not assist petitioners, as they do not broaden the ordinary meaning of the key term action. pennsylvania v. delaware valley citizens council for clean air .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 2006 (SC)

Ashok Mahajan Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-26-2006

Reported in : 2006(4)AWC3849(SC); IV(2006)BC578(SC); [2007]137CompCas704(SC); (2007)3CompLJ538(SC); JT2006(12)SC284; 2006(9)SCALE557; (2006)10SCC332

..... encumbrance; or(b) bar a suit or affect any other right or remedy against any person other than a person referred to in that section, in respect of a contract of indemnity or guarantee entered into a relation to an agreement referred to in that section or in respect of any interest referred to in clause (a).(2) where the property of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 06 2006 (SC)

State Bank of India and anr. Vs. Mula Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-06-2006

Reported in : AIR2007SC2361; 2006(5)ALD35(SC); 2006(3)AWC3124(SC); 2006(6)BomCR143; [2006]132CompCas565(SC); 2006(2)CTLJ1(SC); JT2006(6)SC152; 2006(6)MhLj257; 2006(6)SCALE600; (2006)6SCC

..... was erroneously described as a preamble stating:.the preamble of the document in question creates an impression that the said document is a contract of indemnity and not a contract of guarantee.9.4. the high court, furthermore, inserted some words in the said document which in fact were not there, as for example, in paragraph 31 of ..... . (now reliance energy ltd. v. fenner india ltd. and anr. : air2006sc1148 ). however, in this case, we have no doubt in our mind that the document in question constitutes a contract of indemnity and not an absolute or unconditional bank guarantee. the high court, therefore, erred in construing the same to be an unconditional and absolute bank guarantee.10. rate of interestcontention of ..... or placed on the record by the appellants. the officer of the bank stated before the court that the document in question was intended to be a contract of guarantee and not a contract of indemnity. the written document (exhibit-46) as quoted above lays emphasis on the preamble as under....yet again, in the said paragraph, the operative portion of the document ..... appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that:(i) on a true construction of the document dated 4th september, 1985, it would be seen that the same is a contract of indemnity and not a bank guarantee.(ii) the high court committed a manifest error in considering the oral evidence adduced by the parties in construing the said document dated 4th september .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 29 2006 (FN)

Hamdan Vs. Rumsfeld

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-29-2006

..... for the trial and punishment of offences, either of soldiers or civilians, unless in cases of a controlling necessity, which justifies what it compels, or at least insures acts of indemnity from the justice of the legislature. 4 wall., at 139 140.[ footnote 21 ] whether chief justice chase was correct in suggesting that the president may constitutionally convene military commissions without ..... common article 3 of the geneva conventions is meritless. common article 3 applies to armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the high contracting parties. 6 u. s. t., at 3318. pursuant to [his] authority as commander in chief and chief executive of the united states, the president has accept[ed] the legal ..... because, like article 2, it appears in all four geneva conventions, provides that in a conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the high contracting parties, each party[ footnote 62 ] to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, certain provisions protecting [p]ersons taking no active part in the hostilities, including ..... between signatories. common article 3, which appears in all four conventions, provides that, in a conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the high contracting parties [ i.e., signatories], each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, certain provisions protecting [p]ersons placed hors de combat by detention, including .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 28 2006 (FN)

League of United LatIn American Citizens Vs. Perry

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-28-2006

league of united latin american citizens v. perry - 05-204 (2006) syllabus october term, 2005 league of united latin american citizens v.perry supreme court of the united states league of united latin american citizens et al. v . perry, governor of texas, et al. appeal from the united states district court for the eastern district of texas no. 05 204.?argued march 1, 2006 decided june 28, 2006 the 1990 census resulted in a 3-seat increase over the 27 seats previously allotted the texas congressional delegation. although the democratic party then controlled 19 of those 27 seats, as well as both state legislative houses and the governorship, change was in the air: the republican party had received 47% of the 1990 statewide vote, while the democrats had received only 51%. faced with a possible republican ascent to majority status, the legislature drew a congressional redistricting plan that favored democratic candidates. the republicans challenged the 1991 plan as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander, but to no avail. the 2000 census authorized two additional seats for the texas delegation. the republicans then controlled the governorship and the state senate, but did not yet control the state house of representatives. so constituted, the legislature was unable to pass a redistricting scheme, resulting in litigation and the necessity of a court-ordered plan to comply with the u. s. constitution s one-person, one-vote requirement. conscious that the primary responsibility .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 2006 (FN)

Fernandez-vargas Vs. Gonzales

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-22-2006

fernandez-vargas v. gonzales - 04-1376 (2006) syllabus october term, 2005 fernandez-vargas v. gonzales supreme court of the united states fernandez-vargas v . gonzales, attorney general certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the tenth circuit no. 04 1376.?argued march 22, 2006 decided june 22, 2006 immigration law has for some time provided that an order for removing an alien present unlawfully may be reinstated if he leaves and unlawfully reenters. the illegal immigration reform and immigrant responsibility act of 1996 (iirira) amended the immigration and nationality act (ina) to enlarge the class of illegal reentrants whose orders may be reinstated and limit the possible relief from a removal order available to them. see 241(a)(5), 8 u. s. c. 1235(a)(5). petitioner fernandez-vargas, a mexican citizen, illegally reentered the united states in 1982, after having been deported. he remained undetected for over 20 years, fathering a son in 1989 and marrying the boy s mother, a united states citizen, in 2001. after he filed an application to adjust his status to that of a lawful permanent resident, the government began proceedings to reinstate his 1981 deportation order under 241(a)(5), and deported him. he petitioned the tenth circuit to review the reinstatement order, claiming that, because he illegally reentered the county before iirira s effective date, 241(a)(5) did not bar his application for adjustment of status, and that 241(a)(5) would be impermissibly .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 2006 (FN)

Woodford Vs. Ngo

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-22-2006

woodford v. ngo - 05-416 (2006) syllabus october term, 2005 woodford v. ngo supreme court of the united states woodford et al. v . ngo certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit no. 05 416.?argued march 22, 2006 decided june 22, 2006 the prison litigation reform act of 1995 (plra) requires a prisoner to exhaust any available administrative remedies before challenging prison conditions in federal court. 42 u. s. c. 1997e(a). respondent filed a grievance with california prison officials about his prison conditions, but it was rejected as untimely under state law. he subsequently sued petitioner officials under 1983 in the federal district court, which granted petitioners motion to dismiss on the ground that respondent had not fully exhausted his administrative remedies under 1997e(a). reversing, the ninth circuit held that respondent had exhausted those remedies because none remained available to him. held: the plra s exhaustion requirement requires proper exhaustion of administrative remedies. pp. 5 21. (a) petitioners claim that a prisoner must complete the administrative review process in accordance with applicable procedural rules, including deadlines, as a precondition to bringing suit in federal court, but respondent contends that 1997e(a) allows suit once administrative remedies are no longer available, regardless of the reason. to determine the correct interpretation, the court looks for guidance to both administrative and habeas corpus law, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 19 2006 (FN)

Samson Vs. California

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-19-2006

samson v. california - 04-9728 (2006) october term, 2005 samson v. california supreme court of the united states samson v . california certiorari to the court of appeal of california, first appellate district no. 04 9728.?argued february 22, 2006 decided june 19, 2006 pursuant to a california statute which requires every prisoner eligible for release on state parole to agree in writing to be subject to search or seizure by a parole officer or other peace officer , with or without a search warrant and with or without cause and based solely on petitioner s parolee status, an officer searched petitioner and found methamphetamine. the trial court denied his motions to suppress that evidence, and he was convicted of possession. affirming, the state court of appeal held that suspicionless searches of parolees are lawful under california law and that the search in this case was reasonable under the fourth amendment because it was not arbitrary, capricious, or harassing. held: the fourth amendment does not prohibit a police officer from conducting a suspicionless search of a parolee. pp. 3 12. (a) the totality of the circumstances must be examined to determine whether a search is reasonable under the fourth amendment. united states v. knights, 534 u. s. 112 , 118. reasonableness is determined by assessing, on the one hand, the degree to which [the search] intrudes upon an individual s privacy and, on the other, the degree to which it is needed for the promotion of legitimate .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 05 2006 (FN)

Anza Vs. Ideal Steel Supply Corp.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-05-2006

..... alleged responsible cause cannot be sufficiently established as to the whole or some part of that injury. so it may exist where a known and provable wrong or violation of contract appears, but the alleged loss or injury as a result of it cannot be certainly shown. sutherland 94. footnote 5 nor is it fair to require a plaintiff to prove .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 2006 (FN)

Jones Vs. Flowers

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-26-2006

jones v. flowers - 04-1477 (2006) syllabus october term, 2005 jones v. flowers supreme court of the united states jones v . flowers et al. certiorari to the supreme court of arkansas no. 04 1477.?argued january 17, 2006 decided april 26, 2006 petitioner jones continued to pay the mortgage on his arkansas home after separating from his wife and moving elsewhere in the same city. once the mortgage was paid off, the property taxes which had been paid by the mortgage company went unpaid, and the property was certified as delinquent. respondent commissioner of state lands mailed jones a certified letter at the property s address, stating that unless he redeemed the property, it would be subject to public sale in two years. nobody was home to sign for the letter and nobody retrieved it from the post office within 15 days, so it was returned to the commissioner, marked unclaimed. two years later, the commissioner published a notice of public sale in a local newspaper. no bids were submitted, so the state negotiated a private sale to respondent flowers. before selling the house, the commissioner mailed another certified letter to jones, which was also returned unclaimed. flowers purchased the house and had an unlawful detainer notice delivered to the property. it was served on jones daughter, who notified him of the sale. he filed a state-court suit against respondents, alleging that the commissioner s failure to provide adequate notice resulted in the taking of his property without .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //