28 U.S.C. § 1252
Repealed. Pub. L. 100–352, § 1, June 27, 1988, 102 Stat. 662]
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 205
cases (17 in the last 5 years), 1950–2026 · leading case: United States v. Locke, 471 U.S. 84 (1985).
United States v. Locke, 471 U.S. 84 (1985). “Alternatively, the District Court held that the 1-day late filing "substantially complied" with the Act and regulations. Because a District Court had held an Act of Congress unconstitutional in a civil suit to which the United States was a party, we noted probable jurisdiction…”
Walters v. Nat'l Assn. of Radiation Survivors, 473 U.S. 305 (1985). “This appeal was taken under 28 U. S. C. § 1252 , which grants this Court jurisdiction "from an interlocutory or final judgment, decree or order of any court of the United States .”
Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733 (1974). “Appellants appealed to this Court pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 1252 . We set the case for oral argument, and postponed consideration of the question of our jurisdiction to the hearing on the merits.”
Heckler v. Edwards, 465 U.S. 870 (1984). “” Respondent argued that the Secretary had such a right to direct review to the Supreme Court under 28 U. S. C. § 1252 , because the District Court had held a statute unconstitutional in a civil action to which a United States officer was a party.”
California v. Grace Brethren Church, 457 U.S. 393 (1982). “" 28 U. S. C. § 1252 . *405 The only possible doubt regarding our appellate jurisdiction under this provision is the requirement that the District Court hold "an Act of Congress unconstitutional.”
Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n v. League of Women Voters of California, 468 U.S. 364 (1984). “The FCC appealed from the District Court judgment *373 directly to this Court pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 1252 . We postponed consideration of the question of our jurisdiction to the merits, 460 U.”
Immigr. & Naturalization Serv. v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983). “A Appellate Jurisdiction Both Houses of Congress [4] contend that we are without jurisdiction under 28 U. S. C. § 1252 to entertain the INS appeal in No.”
Regan v. Taxation With Representation of Washington, 461 U.S. 540 (1983). “Appellants appealed pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 1252 , and TWR cross-appealed.”
Corp. of the Presiding Bishop of Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. Amos, 483 U.S. 327 (1987). “The District Court held that it does, and these cases are here on direct appeal pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 1252 . [2] We reverse. I The Deseret Gymnasium (Gymnasium) in Salt Lake City, Utah, is a nonprofit facility, open to the public, run by the Corporation of the Presiding…”
United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252 (1982). “Direct appeal from the judgment of the District Court was taken pursuant to 28 U. S. C. § 1252 . II The exemption provided by § 1402(g) is available only to self-employed individuals and does not apply to employers or employees.”
Norton Ex Rel. Chiles v. Mathews, 427 U.S. 524 (1976). “[4] Section 205 (g) reads in pertinent part: "Any individual, after any final decision of the Secretary made after a hearing to which he was a party, irrespective of the amount in controversy, may obtain a review of such decision by a civil action .”
Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez, 372 U.S. 144 (1963). “" On direct appeal under 28 U. S. C. § 1252 , this Court noted probable jurisdiction, 359 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.