apelleate court sends a case back to the trial court
yes
yes you can
Under original (trial) jurisdiction (disputes between the states);Under appellate jurisdiction from federal courts;Under appellate jurisdiction from the states if the other avenues of appeal have been exhausted and the case involves a preserved federal question.
If the U.S. Supreme Court denies a petition for a writ of certiorari (a request to hear a case on appeal), then the decision of the lower court is final. Denial of certiorari occurs in 98-99% of cases, and in no way implies that the court agrees with the lower court's decision. Denial only means that the case, as presented, isn't of sufficient importance to warrant a review, doesn't involve constitutional issues, conforms to a precedent already set, falls outside the court's jurisdiction, or is moot, etc. Between 7,500 and 8,500 cases are presented for review each year, but the court can only choose 80-150 to hear, so the Justices have to limit themselves to those cases that have the greatest impact on the law and on society. If a case is denied certiorari, the decision of the last "court of competent jurisdiction" to handle the case is affirmed and the case is concluded. Affirmation by default does not necessarily indicate the Supreme Court agrees with the lower court decision; nor does accepting a case for review necessarily mean the Court disagrees with the lower court decision.
It means the US Supreme Court disagreed with the decision of the state supreme court on that particular case, and sent the case back to the state court with specific instructions on what action needed to be taken to correct the problem.
Appeal
Appeal
Appeal
Appeal
If I correctly understand the question, this is generally described as an appellate court upholding or affirming the lower court's rulings.
I think the word you're looking for is "remanded".
AnswerBasically your verdict is dismissed and if the D.A. feels he still has a strong case he has to refile charges and try you again.AnswerThe decision is vacated and the case remanded to the lower court for a new trial.
Unsure exactly what it is that is being asked.Remand - defined: It is a finding by an appellate court, which sends a case back to the trial court for further proceedings. The trial court must conduct further proceedings consistent with the appellate court's ruling.Once a case is "in the judicial system" it does not go away, expire, or have a statute of limitations. On the other hand a remanded case is not instantaneously given priority treatment either. It is simply added to the docket of whatever court it was remanded back to, and will once again come up for hearing/trial in due course.
When an appellate court reverses summary judgment, it means that the court has determined that there are genuine issues of material fact that need to be decided by a jury. The appellate court has concluded that the lower court erred in granting summary judgment, which is a determination made by the court without a trial because there are no disputed facts. The case will typically be remanded back to the trial court for further proceedings or a trial on the merits.
No it is not. If a criminal defendant had been convicted of two charges and the appellate court reversed in part by setting aside the conviction on one of the charges, there would be no remand because the defendant could not be retried on the count reversed. In a civil action, if a plaintiff won on two counts of a complaint and the appellate court reversed the judgment on one by reason of it not being supported by the weight of the evidence, it would not be remanded because the plaintiff doesn't get another chance to prove his case.
Appellate and supreme courts do not generally make "findings of fact." That means they don't think about issues of witness credibility, specific damage amounts, what the conditions of a road were at a particular time, etc. Those jobs are reserved for the trial court. An appellate/supreme court will remand for findings when it wants to send the case back to a trial court for the trial court to get more information before reaching its verdict.
A second time; afresh. A trial or hearing that is ordered by an appellate court that has reviewed the record of a hearing in a lower court and sent the matter back to the original court for a new trial, as if it had not been previously heard nor decided. This applies to law.