Ads
related to: condition subsequent vs precedent set by law california bar review
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Using the precedent set by the Gerstein case – in which the Supreme Court ruled that Florida's practice of keeping suspects for 30 days without probable cause was unconstitutional [3] – and close interpretation of the Fourth Amendment, they found that the County of Riverside's practice of keeping suspects in lengthy custody without probable ...
A condition subsequent is a philosophical and legal term referring to a defined event which terminates a proposition or a contractual obligation. [1][2] In contrast to a condition precedent, a condition subsequent brings the event (or obligation) to an end, rather than being necessary for to the event or obligation to occur. [3] [2]
Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), is the first landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution was interpreted to prohibit criminalization of particular acts or conduct, as contrasted with prohibiting the use of a particular form of punishment for a crime.
Precedent. Precedent is a principle or rule established in a legal case that becomes authoritative to a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar legal issues or facts. [1][2][3] The legal doctrine stating that courts should follow precedent is called stare decisis (a Latin phrase with the literal meaning "to stand by ...
A condition precedent is an event or state of affairs that is required before something else will occur. In contract law, a condition precedent is an event which must occur, unless its non-occurrence is excused, before performance under a contract becomes due, i.e., before any contractual duty exists. [1] In estate and trust law, it is a ...
Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410 (2006), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision involving First Amendment free speech protections for government employees. The plaintiff in the case was a district attorney who claimed that he had been passed up for a promotion for criticizing the legitimacy of a warrant. The Court ruled, in a 5–4 decision, that ...