value of an individual’s property. In order to exercise this jurisdiction‚ the plaintiff must have seized and attached the property. In an effort to expand jurisdiction‚ the court instituted the minimum contacts test. This test was expanded by Hess v. Pawloski‚ when a Massachusetts court determined that due his activities within the state‚ a nonresident of Massachusetts was still subject to the court’s jurisdiction‚ regarding a suit for a traffic accident. The court held that use of a state’s highways
Premium Jurisdiction Civil procedure
or the remarriage of the party receiving maintenance." In the case of Kathy I. Palmer‚ Petitioner/Appellee‚ v. Sydney N. Palmer‚ Respondent/Appellant‚ Sydney (husband) referenced the above statute when filing for termination of spousal maintenance. The court had to consider whether a specified end date in the Decree took precedence over the general interpretation of the law. Facts of the Case: Palmer v. Palmer The facts of this case are as follows: The marriage between Palmer and Palmer was dissolved
Premium United States Marriage Employment
Title: R. v. Hufsky‚ [1988] 1 S.C.R 621 Parties: Werner E. J. Hufsky – Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen - Respondent Decision: Appeal was dismissed Notions/Concepts: Constitutional Law Criminal Law Equality before the law Charter of Rights and Freedoms Arbitrary detention Unreasonable Search Refusal to provide breath sample Facts: Appellant was stopped at a random spot check by police Nothing unusual about his driving at the time of the spot check Spot check was for the purposes
Premium Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Supreme Court of the United States
No. 07-0268 __________________________________________________________ IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES _____________ ANDREA “ANDY” SOMMERVILLE‚ Petitioners-Appellants v. WLLIAM DENOLF Respondent-Appellee ------------------------------------------------- On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventeenth Circuit _____________ BRIEF FOR RESPONDENT _____________ QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1) Whether the Gun Free School Zone
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States United States Constitution
FACTS OF THE CASE: The Appellant‚ Director of Finance at Toyota Marin Lou Suriyan Sisuphan‚ took almost $30‚000 in order to persuade the termination of Sisuphan’s coworker Ian McClelland by suggesting that McClelland should be held responsible for the lost money. The Appellant did not have the intention to take this money permanently‚ and returned the money before any charges were filed‚ but not within the 24 hour amnesty period that the dealership offered. The dealership terminated Sisphan’s employment
Premium
McWilliams V Dunn Supreme Court of the United States Introduction The Dunn v. McWilliams case is a famous court case that was heard before the supreme court of United States in April 24‚ 2017. The case involved James McWilliams as the petitioner against Jefferson Dunn was the commissioner and was representing the Alabama department of corrections. The focus of the case was the sixth amendment of the US constitution was useful in providing for the right to the assistance of an attorney to represent
Premium United States Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution
people peaceably to assemble‚ and to petition the government for a redress of grievances” (http://www.law.cornell.edu). Over the years there have been many court cases that try to help decipher what is mean by the 1st amendment. In 1942 commercial speech was introduced by the Supreme Court with the Valentine V. Chrestensen case. Commercial Speech is speech done on behalf of a company or individual for the intent of making a profit. It is economic in nature and usually has the intent of convincing
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
Bria Payton Case Brief: United States v. Peterson‚ 483 F.2d 1222 (1973) Issue: Is self-defense available for a justifiable homicide case? Facts: The victim‚ Charles Keitt‚ drove to an alley way to obtain windshield wipers off the defendant’s car‚ Mr. Peterson. Mr. Peterson observed the victim‚ Mr. Keitt‚ doing this and confronted him with an altercation. The victim went back to his car and the defendant‚ Mr. Peterson‚ returned inside his home. The victim was about to leave‚ but because the defendant
Premium
1. Mapp v. Ohio‚ 170 Ohio St. 427‚ 166 N. E. 2d 387‚ reversed. 2. Dollree Mapp was convicted on one count in the Ohio State Court for the possession of obscene material. The possession of obscene material was illegal in Ohio and the time of the search. There was dispute of whether or not the search was permitted by search warrant. She was eventually found guilty of by the State of Ohio because the state said‚ “even if the search were made without authority‚ otherwise unreasonably‚ it is not prevented
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States Mapp v. Ohio
no means just. It is clear that for certain people‚ life is easier than for others. These people are the able-bodied white men whose quality of life greatly outshines the lives of people of color and those with mental illnesses. In Breakfast of Champions‚ Kurt Vonnegut identifies the irony in America’s unjust treatment of its citizens while emphasizing the neglect of those with mental illness in a consumeristic
Premium Suicide United States Kurt Vonnegut