Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
This is a partial chronological list of cases decided by the United States Supreme Court during the tenures of Chief Justices John Jay (October 19, 1789 – June 29, 1795), John Rutledge (August 12, 1795 – December 28, 1795), and Oliver Ellsworth (March 8, 1796 – December 15, 1800), respectively the Jay, Rutledge, and Ellsworth Courts.
Engblom v. Carey, 677 F.2d 957 (2d Cir. 1982), is a landmark decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit interpreting the Third Amendment to the United States Constitution for the first time.
These lists are sorted chronologically by chief justice and include most major cases decided by the court. Jay, Rutledge, and Ellsworth Courts (October 19, 1789 – December 15, 1800) Marshall Court (February 4, 1801 – July 6, 1835)
While a mediator may charge a fee comparable to that of an attorney, the mediation process generally takes much less time than moving a case through standard legal channels. While a case in the hands of a lawyer or a court may take months or years to resolve, mediation usually achieves a resolution in a matter of hours.
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that under the Due Process Clause of the Constitution of the United States, the prosecution must turn over to a criminal defendant any significant evidence in its possession that suggests the defendant is not guilty (exculpatory evidence).
Although Astor died, the case is ongoing. Anthony Marshall was found guilty of a number of fraud and conspiracy charges, as well as first-degree grand larceny, and was sentenced to 1 to 3 years in ...
This case featured the first example of judicial review by the Supreme Court. Ware v. Hylton, 3 U.S. 199 (1796) A section of the Treaty of Paris supersedes an otherwise valid Virginia statute under the Supremacy Clause. This case featured the first example of judicial nullification of a state law. Fletcher v.
Mediation cases were handled by people appointed as Commissioners of Conciliation, [2] who vowed to act impartially. [5] The conciliation process could be brought into play for both strike actions and lockouts and for any other type of industrial and labor relations matter. [2] Participation in mediation was voluntary. [2]