Contrary to definition

Contrary to means that the state court decision “contradicts the United States Supreme Court on a settled question of law or holds differently than did that Court on a set of materially indistinguishable facts.” Kimbrough v. Secretary, Florida Dept. of Corrections, 565 F.3d 796, 799 (11th Cir. 2009). See also Bell v.

AI-Powered Contracts

Draft, Review & Redline at the Speed of AI

Contrary to means "'diametrically different,' 'opposite in character or nature,' or 'mutually opposed.'" Id. A state court decision can be "contrary to" federal law in two ways:

Contrary to means that the state court applied a different rule than one set forth by the Supreme Court, or that it decided a case differently than the Supreme Court has “on a set of materially indistinguishable facts.” Bell v. Cone, 535 U.S. 685, 694 (2002). A state court’s resolution of a claim is an “unreasonable application” of federal law when its decision (1) identifies the correct legal rule from the Supreme Court’s cases but unreasonably applies it to the facts of the particular petitioner’s case, or (2) “either unreasonably extends a legal principle from [Supreme Court]

Examples of Contrary to in a sentence

Contrary to or inconsistent with, adding to, subtracting from, or modifying, altering or ignoring in any way, the terms of this Agreement, or of applicable law or rules or regulations having the force and effect of law.
Contrary to or inconsistent with, adding to, subtracting from, or modifying, altering, or ignoring in any way, the terms of this Agreement, or of applicable law or rules or regulations having the force and effect of law.
No Action Contrary to the Lessee's Rights Under the Lease...................................................
Contrary to this, the process of proportional Allocation or the process of declaration with taking- over of difference quantities through a balancing shipper may be applied in individual cases where required.
Contrary to the provisions in paragraph 2, a notice period of one month will apply for notice of termination under paragraph 1c and the statutory notice periods for notice of termination under paragraph 1b, unless the employee is disabled or chronically ill, in which event the notice period referred to in paragraph 2 will apply.

More Definitions of Contrary to

Contrary to provision means the state court failed to apply the holding of a Supreme Court case, or made a decision contrary to the holding of a Supreme Court case when the facts that were presented were “materially indistinguishable” from those in the cited decision. Id.

Contrary to means it is impossible to comply with both state law and HIPAA

Contrary to means “diametrically different,” “opposite in character or nature,” or “mutually opposed.” Id. The “contrary to” prong of AEDPA applies when “the state court reaches a conclusion opposite to the Supreme Court‟s own conclusion on a question of law or decides the case differently where the Supreme Court was confronted by a set of materially indistinguishable facts.” McMullen, 562 F.3d at

Contrary to means the state court applied a rule different from the governing law set forth in Supreme Court cases, or decided a case differently than the Supreme Court on materially indistinguishable facts Bell v. Cone, 535 U.S. 685 (2002)

Contrary to. ’ means, in essence, that it is impossible to comply with both the federal and state law, or the state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment or execution of the purpose of the Privacy Rule. Given this narrow interpretation of ‘‘contrary,’’ it is rare that a state law will be truly ‘‘contrary to’’ a provision of the Privacy Rule, as both authorities are (almost always)

Contrary to prong of § 2254(d)(1) means that a state court decision “arrives at a conclusion opposite to that reached by [the Supreme] Court on a question of law” or “confronts facts that are materially indistinguishable from a relevant Supreme Court precedent and arrives at [an opposite] result.” Williams v. Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 405 (2000). In other words, “the state court’s decision must be substantially different from the relevant [Supreme Court] precedent.” Id.

Contrary to means the state court applied “a rule different from the governing law set forth in [Supreme Court] cases,” or it decided a case differently than the Supreme Court has done “on a set of materially indistinguishable facts.” Bell v. Cone, 535 U.S. 685, 694, 122 S. Ct. 1843, 1850 (2002). A state court’s