U.S. Supreme Court TEXAS v. JOHNSON‚ 491 U.S. 397 (1989) 491 U.S. 397 Citation: Johnson was convicted of desecration of a venerated object in violation of a Texas statute. Date Decided: June 21‚ 1989 Facts of case: At the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas‚ Texas‚ Johnson decided to burn an American flag in protest of some policies made by the Reagan administration and some Dallas corporations that he did not agree with. Noone sustained physical injury or was even
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States United States
The rule in Ryland’s v Fletcher was established in the case Rylands v Fletcher [1868]‚ decided by Blackburn J. In effect‚ it is a tort of strict liability “imposed upon a landowner who collects certain things on his land – a duty insurance against harm caused by their escape regardless of the owner’s fault”. The tort under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher is described as one of strict liability. This means that liability may be imposed on a party without finding of fault such as negligence. The plaintiff
Premium Tort Tort Complaint
contact + IST-EPFL Joint Doctoral Initiative c/o Prof. José Santos-Victor VP International Affairs Conselho de Gestão Instituto Superior Técnico Av. Rovisco Pais‚ 1 1049-001 Lisbon PORTUGAL Date‚ . Subject: IST-EPFL Joint Doctoral Initiative‚ Grant Acceptance Dear Sirs‚ I hereby acknowledge that I understand‚ agree to abide by‚ and comply fully with the Terms and Conditions of the FCT Doctoral Grant1‚ offered in the framework of the IST-EPFL Joint Doctoral Initiative2. I further confirm
Premium Lisbon University Doctor of Philosophy
The Zykan v. Warsaw Community School Corporation and Warsaw School Board of Trustees was a case regarding the limiting and prohibition of textbooks‚ removing books from the library and deleting courses from the curriculum. The case was disregarded by the district court‚ and was brought to the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Ultimately‚ the court ruled that the school had a right to establish whatever curriculum that it wanted‚ but it was not allowed to restrict learning. The student’s right
Premium Supreme Court of the United States First Amendment to the United States Constitution High school
In the state of Ohio‚ the courts have taken a pro-business approach‚ at least regarding the nursing home industry‚ as is evidenced‚ by the ruling of the Supreme court in the Hayes v. Oakridge case. In analysis of this case‚ the case involved a lawsuit filed against The Oakridge Home‚ an Ohio nursing home‚ by a former resident‚ Florence Hayes. The lawsuit alleged that while Hayes was a resident at the nursing home‚ she suffered serious injuries in a fall and that the fall was the result of negligence
Premium United States Supreme Court of the United States Jury
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
Title: Mapp v. Ohio Legal Citation: 367 U.S. 643‚ 81 S.Ct. 1680‚ 6 L.ED.2d. 1081 (1961( Procedural History: Mapp petition for a writ of Certiorari to the Supreme Court for the appreal from the Supreme Court of Ohio. Statement of key Issues: 1) was the search of Mapps home a violation of the fourth amendment? 2) Was the evidence used against Mapps in court illegal? Facts: On May 23‚ 1957‚ three Cleveland police officers arrived at Mapps Home to ask them questions pertaining to someone
Premium United States Constitution Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
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