When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Holding (law) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holding_(law)

    The holding is a court's determination of a matter of law based on the issue presented in the particular case.In other words: under this law, with these facts, this result. It is the same as a 'decision' made by the judge; however "decision" can also refer to the judge's entire opinion, containing, for example, a discussion of facts, issues, and law as well as the holding.

  3. Monell v. Department of Social Services of the City of New York

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monell_v._Department_of...

    Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978), is an opinion given by the United States Supreme Court in which the Court overruled Monroe v. Pape by holding that a local government is a "person" subject to suit under Section 1983 of Title 42 of the United States Code: Civil action for deprivation of rights. [1]

  4. Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seila_Law_LLC_v._Consumer...

    Seila Law LLC (Seila Law), a law firm that provided debt relief services, was under investigation by the CFPB. As part of its investigation, the CFPB issued a civil investigative demand (CID) to Seila Law, which required Seila Law to produce certain documents. Seila Law declined to comply with the CID and challenged the constitutionality of the ...

  5. Police Cannot Seize Property Indefinitely After an Arrest ...

    www.aol.com/news/police-cannot-seize-property...

    Many circuit courts have said that law enforcement can hold your property for as long as they want. D.C.’s high court decided last week that’s unconstitutional.

  6. Hudson v. Palmer - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudson_v._Palmer

    Argument: Oral argument: Case history; Prior: Palmer v. Hudson, 697 F.2d 1220 (4th Cir. 1983); cert. granted, 463 U.S. 1206 (1983).: Holding; Prison inmates have no reasonable expectation of privacy in their cells under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, and destruction of property did not constitute a Due Process violation under the Fourteenth Amendment because Virginia had adequate state ...

  7. Supreme Court ruling leaves door open for states to ... - AOL

    www.aol.com/supreme-court-ruling-leaves-door...

    The Supreme Court’s decision could reinforce these actions, without providing any parameters for how they should be applied by the states. Let’s play this out in a different setting.

  8. Bates v. State Bar of Arizona - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bates_v._State_Bar_of_Arizona

    Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the right of lawyers to advertise their services. [1] In holding that lawyer advertising was commercial speech entitled to protection under the First Amendment (incorporated against the States through the Fourteenth Amendment), the Court upset the tradition against advertising ...

  9. Gideon v. Wainwright - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gideon_v._Wainwright

    Gideon overruled Betts, holding that the assistance of counsel, if desired by a defendant who could not afford to hire counsel, was a fundamental right under the United States Constitution, binding on the states, and essential for a fair trial and due process of law regardless of the circumstances of the case. The Court explained its rationale ...