Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Petitioners further argued that even if the less demanding exacting scrutiny test were applied, the California requirement was overly broad and hence unconstitutional. [1] In response, California urged the Court to review the case under the lower standard of exacting scrutiny. The State argued that the request for all Schedule B's was ...
Lange v. California, 594 U.S. ___ (2021), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the exigent circumstances requirement related to the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court ruled unanimously that the warrantless entry into a home by police in pursuit of a misdemeanant is not unequivocally justified.
Held that proponents of a California ballot initiative against gay marriage did not have standing to defend the law in court after the governor and attorney general refused to do so; The decision had the effect of legalizing gay marriage in California: 5–4 Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins: 2016
Mayo v. Prometheus, 566 U.S. 66 (2012), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that unanimously held that claims directed to a method of giving a drug to a patient, measuring metabolites of that drug, and with a known threshold for efficacy in mind, deciding whether to increase or decrease the dosage of the drug, were not patent-eligible subject matter.
Sheetz v. County of El Dorado (Docket No. 22-1074) is a United States Supreme Court case regarding permit exactions under the Takings Clause.The Supreme Court held, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, that fees for land-use permits must be closely related and roughly proportional to the effects of the land use – the test established by Nollan v.
Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that added behavior that "shocks the conscience" into tests of what violates due process clause of the 14th Amendment. [1] This balancing test is often criticized as having subsequently been used in a particularly subjective manner. [2] [3]
The California Supreme Court ruling curtails the ability of public employees in the state to seek help from the courts in labor disputes. Public employees cannot use labor law to sue employers ...
The Supreme Court has held [11] that the machine-or-transformation test is not the sole test for the patent-eligibility of processes. The certiorari petition in Bilski challenged that proposition. [ 12 ] and the Supreme Court's Bilski opinion expressly rejected the Federal Circuit's declaration that it was the exclusive test to apply; despite a ...