Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
As an example of the law itself, the State of Michigan defines the offense (MCL 750.249): "Any person who utters and publishes as true any false, forged, altered or counterfeit record, deed, instrument or other writing specified, knowing it to be false, altered, forged, or counterfeit, with intent to injure or defraud is guilty of uttering and ...
The prosecutors felt that Utter was too quick to throw court cases out on technicalities, letting "criminals go free". [5] In 1978, Utter dissented from the majority opinion in State v. Riker, arguing that evidence that Riker suffered from "battered woman syndrome" should have been admitted in the case.
State v. Abbott, 36 N.J. 63, 174 A.2d 881 (1961), [1] is a landmark case in the American legal doctrine of retreat.In it, the New Jersey Supreme Court unanimously adopted a duty to retreat—a legal requirement that a threatened person cannot stand one's ground and apply lethal force in self-defense, but must instead retreat to a place of safety. [2]
Strader v. Graham: 51 U.S. 82 (1851) slavery and the application of state laws thereof Cooley v. Board of Wardens: 53 U.S. 299 (1852) pilotage laws under the Commerce Clause: Dred Scott v. Sandford: 60 U.S. 393 (1857) slavery, the definition of citizenship Ableman v. Booth: 62 U.S. 506 (1859) The contradiction of Federal law by States Prize ...
In the 1987 case of South Dakota v. Dole, [17] the Court reaffirmed congressional authority to attach conditional strings to receipt of federal funds by state or local governments, but said there can be no surprises; Congress must enable the states "to exercise their choice knowingly, cognizant of the consequences of their participation." The ...
In 1993, the Supreme Court rejected a purely subjective definition of a "sham" lawsuit, and set out a two-part test. [18] Under the first prong of the test, a lawsuit fits within the "sham" exception to First Amendment immunity only if the lawsuit is objectively baseless in that "no reasonable litigant could realistically expect success on the ...
The Parker immunity doctrine is an exemption from liability for engaging in antitrust violations. It applies to the state when it exercises legislative authority in creating a regulation with anticompetitive effects, and to private actors when they act at the direction of the state after it has done so.
Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the constitutionality of police sobriety checkpoints. The Court held 6-3 that these checkpoints met the Fourth Amendment standard of "reasonable search and seizure." However, upon remand to the Michigan Supreme Court, that court held ...