Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
MLA Style Manual, formerly titled MLA Style Manual and Guide to Scholarly Publishing in its second (1998) and third edition (2008), was an academic style guide by the United States–based Modern Language Association of America (MLA) first published in 1985. MLA announced in April 2015 that the publication would be discontinued: the third ...
One line/docket order. Cline v. Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice: 571 U.S. 985: 27 Jun 2013 N/A 4 Nov 2013 One line/docket order. Before the DIG, the Court certified a question of Oklahoma law to the Supreme Court of Oklahoma, and received its response. McCarver v. North Carolina: 533 U.S. 975: 26 Mar 2001 N/A 25 Sep 2001 One line ...
However, where such facts exist, a party to the case may suggest recusal. Controversially, each judge generally decides whether or not to recuse themself. [1] [19] However, where lower courts are concerned, an erroneous refusal to recuse in a clear case can be reviewed on appeal or, under extreme circumstances, by a petition for a writ of ...
Allegory with a portrait of a Venetian senator (Allegory of the morality of earthly things), attributed to Tintoretto, 1585 Morality (from Latin moralitas 'manner, character, proper behavior') is the categorization of intentions, decisions and actions into those that are proper, or right, and those that are improper, or wrong. [1]
This can be the right to avoid self-incrimination or the right to remain silent when questioned. The right may include the provision that adverse inferences cannot be made by the judge or jury regarding the refusal by a defendant to answer questions before or during a trial, hearing or any other legal proceeding.
Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, 7–2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failing to enforce a restraining order, which had led to the murders of a woman's three children by her estranged husband. [1]
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. [1] The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action".
Despite attempting to avoid appearing personally before the court, citing security concerns, the Supreme Court ordered Jayalalithaa to do so. [11] Her deposition lasted two days in October 2011. [5] In 2012, Karnataka Advocate General B.V.Acharya, who had spent seven years building the case, resigned as the Special Public Prosecutor. He told ...