Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Tortious interference with contract rights can occur when one party persuades another to breach its contract with a third party (e.g., using blackmail, threats, influence, etc.) or where someone knowingly interferes with a contractor's ability to perform his contractual obligations, preventing the client from receiving the services or goods ...
Since its formulation, the doctrine has been extended to confer immunity from a variety of tort claims, including claims of unfair competition, tortious interference and abuse of process. [15] The Ninth Circuit recently held that Noerr–Pennington also protects against RICO Act claims when a defendant has sent thousands of demand letters ...
Williams v. Illinois, 567 U.S. 50 (2012) was a United States Supreme Court case where it was ruled that having an expert witness testify on behalf of a third-party lab analyst does not violate the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause as long as the results were not directed to prove guilt.
Case history; Prior: 58 Ill. App. 3d 57, 373 N. E. 2d 1013: Holding; When a search warrant specifies the person or people named in the warrant to be searched and the things to be seized, there is no authority to search others not named in the warrant, unless the warrant specifically mentions that the unnamed parties are involved in criminal activity or exigent circumstances are clearly shown.
The Supreme Court decision in Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois, 146 U.S. 387 (1892), reaffirmed that each state in its sovereign capacity holds title to all submerged lands within its borders and holds these lands in public trust. [1] This is a foundational case for the public trust doctrine.
Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc., 547 U.S. 28 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the application of U.S. antitrust law to "tying" arrangements of patented products. [1]
Witherspoon v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 510 (1968), was a U.S. Supreme Court case where the court ruled that a state statute providing the state unlimited challenge for cause of jurors who might have any objection to the death penalty violated the constitutional right to an impartial jury.
Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U.S. 719 (1992), is a case decided by the United States Supreme Court. The case established the right of defendants to challenge for cause any juror that would automatically impose the death penalty in all capital cases.