Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Pierson v. Post is generally considered the most famous property law case in American legal history. [1] Although it only involved a dispute over which of two men deserved ownership of a fox, adjudicating the dispute required determining at what point a wild animal becomes "property".
Katko v. Briney, 183 N.W.2d 657 (Iowa 1971), is a court case decided by the Iowa Supreme Court, in which homeowners Edward and Bertha Briney were held liable for battery for injuries caused to trespasser Marvin Katko, who set off a spring gun set as a mantrap in an uninhabited house on their property. [1]
The Relu Ram Poonia MLA murder case or Poonia murders was a mass murder of the Indian politician Relu Ram Poonia and seven of his family members. The murders were committed by Ram's daughter Sonia, along with her husband Sanjeev Kumar, on the night of 23 August 2001 over a property dispute.
Trial by combat (also wager of battle, trial by battle or judicial duel) was a method of Germanic law to settle accusations in the absence of witnesses or a confession in which two parties in dispute fought in single combat; the winner of the fight was proclaimed to be right. In essence, it was a judicially sanctioned duel.
Not every famous estate fight is over money, though. One notorious battle that made headlines around the world was over what should happen to the body, particularly the head, of famous baseball ...
The following torts with regard to personal property exist in India and other common law jurisdictions: Trespass to chattels is any direct interference with property other than land in the lawful possession of another person without thereby depriving the person of possession as a whole.
In this way, two lists were to be made, if there is a dispute over the property of the transferring property to a new state and the personal property of the other princely states, then the Court will not have the right of trial under Article 363 of the Constitution and the State Ministry of the Government of India (the current home).
A law depriving a person of 'personal liberty' must not violate any of the Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. This judgement thus overruled A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950) [ 23 ] Court upheld the validity of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950, with the exception of Section 14, which restricted disclosure of the grounds of ...