Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court overturned the ruling of the Illinois courts. Justice William Rehnquist delivered the decision in favor of the State of Illinois. Justice Rehnquist stated: We agree with the Illinois Supreme Court that an informant's "veracity," "reliability" and "basis of knowledge" are all highly relevant in determining the value of his report.
Months earlier, in a case cited in this decision, In re Anglin, 122 Ill.2d 531, 525 N.E.2d 550 (May 18, 1988), the Illinois Supreme Court refused to reinstate the law license of an attorney convicted of (among other felonies) possessing stolen securities, and who wished to be reinstated while continuing to withhold the name of the person or ...
Case name Citation Date decided Gilligan v. Morgan: 413 U.S. 1: 1973: Miller v. California: 413 U.S. 15: 1973: Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton: 413 U.S. 49
Mead sold Lexis, and Illinois maintained that Mead must pay them a proportionate capital-gains tax. [3] Illinois asserted that Mead and Lexis were integrated to the extent required for the "unitary business rule". [4] This rule allowed states to tax a proportionate share of the value generated by an interstate corporation. [5]
The Supreme Court of Illinois is the state supreme court, the highest court of the judiciary of Illinois.The court's authority is granted in Article VI of the current Illinois Constitution, which provides for seven justices elected from the five appellate judicial districts of the state: three justices from the First District (Cook County) and one from each of the other four districts.
During the hearing on the motion, the prosecution argued that the search was justified by Section 108-9 of the Illinois Code of Criminal Procedure of 1963 (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1975, ch. 38, par. 108-9), which reads, "In the execution of the warrant the person executing the same may reasonably detain the search any person in the place at the time ...
On preliminary grounds, Illinois’ case was considered by the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year, but after a conference, Justice Clarence Thomas denied writs of certiorari, saying the case ...
Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc., 547 U.S. 28 (2006), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the application of U.S. antitrust law to "tying" arrangements of patented products. [1]