violation of the law. According to the case‚ In re Kaitangian (1998) 218 B.R. 102‚ 113 it basically states‚ "bankruptcy petition preparers are strictly limited to typing bankruptcy forms...”
Premium Law Employment Supreme Court of the United States
Tinker v. Des Moines is a court case that happened in 1969 and was a dispute about wearing armbands to school for a protest against the Vietnam war. The principals did not like the idea of the protest and decided to shut it down by banning all armbands. The students weren’t going to go down without a fight and wore them anyway. This case all started with a meeting at Christopher Echardt’s house to do a silent protest of the Vietnam war. The “Tinker kids” decided the wear two-inch-wide black armbands
Premium Supreme Court of the United States High school First Amendment to the United States Constitution
Miller v. StateSupreme Court of Nevada‚ 1996991 P. 2d 1183People in the United States commit crimes and make up excuses why they should not be held accountable for a crime. Insanity and temporary Insanity have significant differences. One might ask themselves is there really any meaningful difference? During the history of our court system there has been many significant court decisions which address the controversy topics of insanity and temporary insanity as it relates to criminal procedures. One
Premium Insanity defense Law Mental disorder
Subashini Rajasingam v. Saravanan Thangathoray & Other Appeals [2008] 2 CLJ 1 FC Summary of the case: (4 marks) There were three appeals (02-19-2007(W)‚ 02-20-2007(W) and 02-21-2007(W)) before us and with the agreements of the parties‚ they were heard together. The parties to the three appeals were originally Hindus husband and wife; they were married pursuant to a civil ceremony of marriage that was registered on 26 July 2001 pursuant to the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 (the 1976
Premium Marriage Appeal
specifically states that an arrest warrant must be based on probable cause and supported by oath or affirmation (Hall‚ 2014). It further stipulates that people to be seized must be specifically addressed in the warrant (Hall‚ 2014). In a 1980 case law‚ Payton v. New York‚ an arrest warrant allows an officer to enter a home to effect an arrest as long as there is reason to believe
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Law Police
The DSM-V and Gender Identity Disorder UVIC April 5‚ 2012 Table of Contents Introduction 1-2 Diagnostic and Statistics Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM) 2-3 Problems with the Current Diagnostic Criteria for GID Support of Keeping the GID Diagnosis in DSM-V Therapists Role in Transgendered Issues Introduction Although Gender Identity Disorder (GID) and homosexuality has been in the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Premium Transgender
them to one another in V for Vendetta. There is no doubt that V is a variable in V for Vendetta. In an equation‚ a variable is a representation and it can be changed. V is a representation for an idea being portrayed throughout the book and we certainly see the transformation of this variable. The names V‚ Valerie‚ and Evey act as a changing identity throughout a common idea. V is first evolved from Valerie who later turns Evey into the next V protégé. Why choose the codename V for the main character
Premium V for Vendetta
The Korematsu v. United States (1944) case was an unjustifiable case towards individuals with a particular race‚ but even though at the moment it seemed like the appropriate action to take for the protection of the people in our country‚ the action towards this race was completely inappropriate and unconstitutional. During the War of World War II‚ the president of the United States‚ Franklin Roosevelt put a float the Executive Order 9066 that targeted individuals from the Pacific Coast of Japanese
Premium United States Franklin D. Roosevelt World War II
Ermina Dedic Legal Brief 1 Name of Case: Dow Chemical Co. v United States. Court: U.S. Supreme Court Citation: 476 U.S. 227 (1986) Parties and their roles: Dow Chemical (Plaintiffs/Petitioner) and United States (Defendants/ Respondents) Facts: Dow Chemical operates a two-thousand-acre chemical plant at Midland‚ Michigan. The facility‚ with numerous buildings‚ conduits‚ and pipes‚ are visible from the air. Dow has maintained ground security at the
Premium United States Law Appeal
Name Geringer v. Wildhorn Ranch‚ Inc. 706 F.Supp. 1442 D.Colo. 1988. December 14‚ 1988 Procedural History: The mother and widow of deceased resort guests took an action against the resort‚ its owner‚ and others because these two deceased guests lost their lives in boating accident. Mr. Watters‚ defendant and the owner of the resort‚ brought an action against the verdict for revised decision because the trial court found him guilty. The case came in front of the court on action of defendants
Premium Plaintiff Court Jury