Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In his book Critics Dilemma (1966), Dingwall supported Hall's criticism of the spiritualist William Crookes and the medium Florence Cook. [29] [30] He investigated the mediumship of Eusapia Palladino and came to the conclusion she was "vital, vulgar, amorous and a cheat." [31] In 1920, Dingwall with V. J. Woolley tested the medium Eva Carrière in
Bond v. United States, 564 U.S. 211 (2011) An individual litigant has standing to challenge a federal statute on grounds of federalism. Arizona v. United States, 567 U.S. 387 (2012) An Arizona law that authorizes local law enforcement to enforce immigration laws is preempted by federal law. Arizona law enforcement may inquire about a resident's ...
Ex parte Mitsuye Endo, 323 U.S. 283 (1944), was a United States Supreme Court ex parte decision handed down on December 18, 1944, in which the Court unanimously ruled that the U.S. government could not continue to detain a citizen who was "concededly loyal" to the United States. [1]
Kan'ichi Asakawa (朝河 貫一, Asakawa Kan'ichi, December 20, 1873 – August 11, 1948) [2] was a Japanese academic, author, historian, curator and peace advocate.Asakawa was Japanese by birth and citizenship though he lived the majority of his life in the United States.
Dingwall was born on 6 August 1950. [3] He attended the independent St Peter's School, York from 1963 to 1968.. At St John's College, Cambridge, [4] Dingwall studied economics for part I of the Tripos and then switched to social and political science for part II, [3] graduating with a Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree in 1971: as per tradition, his BA was promoted to a Master of Arts (MA Cantab ...
United States v. Dinitz , 424 U.S. 600 (1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States determined that the U.S. Const., Amend. V protection against double jeopardy did not prevent a retrial of a defendant, who had previously requested a mistrial.
Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States, 338 U.S. 1 (1949), affirmed the principle set forth in The West River Bridge Company v. Dix et al. , 47 U.S. 507 (1848); that is, that intangible property rights are condemnable via the eminent domain power, and that just compensation must be given to the owners of such rights.
United States v. Young may refer to: Cases of the Supreme Court of the United States: United States v. Young, 94 U.S. 258 (1877) United States v.