Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Hall v. Florida, 572 U.S. 701 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a bright-line IQ threshold requirement for determining whether someone has an intellectual disability (formerly mental retardation) is unconstitutional in deciding whether they are eligible for the death penalty.
Case Ruling Right 1976 Profitt v. Florida: Permitted comparison of mitigating and aggravating factors to decide death penalty decisions. [3] See also Furman v. Georgia (1972), and Gregg v. Georgia (1976) 1st 1986 Ford v. Wainwright: Preventing the execution [capital punishment] of the insane, requiring an evaluation of competency and an ...
National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corporation, 452 F. Supp. 2d 946 (N.D. Cal. 2006), was a class action lawsuit in the United States that was filed on February 7, 2006, in the Superior Court of California for the County of Alameda, and subsequently moved to federal court (the district court for the northern district of California). [1]
United States veterans case law (1 C, 10 P) Pages in category "United States disability case law" The following 57 pages are in this category, out of 57 total.
The Zebley claim was originally denied by the state disability determination services (DDS) in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. On July 12, 1983, plaintiffs, including Zebley, filed a class action complaint challenging the Social Security Administration (SSA) listing-only policy of evaluating childhood disability claims. Community Legal Services of ...
Death as the main story: For deaths where the cause of death itself is a major story (such as the unexpected death of a prominent figure by homicide, suicide, or accident) or where the events surrounding the death merit additional explanation (such as ongoing investigations, major stories about memorial services or international reactions, etc ...
Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999), is a United States Supreme Court case regarding discrimination against people with mental disabilities. The Supreme Court held that under the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals with mental disabilities have the right to live in the community rather than in institutions if, in the words of the opinion of the Court, "the State's treatment ...
United States, 712 F.2d 391 (9th Cir. 1983) is a landmark case in which the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals determined that a mental health professional's duty to predict dangerousness includes consulting a patient's prior records, and that their duty to protect includes the involuntary commitment of a dangerous individual; simply warning the ...