Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In law, ex parte (/ ɛ k s ˈ p ɑːr t eɪ,-iː /) is a Latin term meaning literally "from/out of the party/faction [1] of" (name of party/faction, often omitted), thus signifying "on behalf of (name)". An ex parte decision is one decided by a judge without requiring all of the parties to the dispute to be present.
Ex parte Milligan, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 2 (1866), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that ruled that the use of military tribunals to try civilians when civil courts are operating is unconstitutional.
Ex parte Grossman, 267 U.S. 87 (1925), was a US Supreme Court case that held that the US President may pardon criminal contempt of court. [1] [2] Grossman had been convicted of criminal contempt but was pardoned by the President. The district court subsequently sent him back to prison.
Ex parte Merryman, 17 F. Cas. 144 (C.C.D. Md. 1861) (No. 9487), was a controversial U.S. federal court case that arose out of the American Civil War. [1] It was a test of the authority of the President to suspend "the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus " under the Constitution's Suspension Clause , when Congress was in recess and therefore ...
Ex parte Vallandigham, 68 U.S. (1 Wall.) 243 (1864), is a United States Supreme Court case, involving a former congressman Clement Vallandigham of Ohio, who had violated an Army order against the public expression of sympathy for the Confederate States and their cause.
Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 333 (1866), was an important United States Supreme Court case involving the disbarment of former Confederate officials.
Ex parte Crow Dog, 109 U.S. 556 (1883), is a landmark [1] [2] decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that followed the death of one member of a Native American tribe at the hands of another on reservation land. [fn 1] Crow Dog was a member of the Brulé band of the Lakota Sioux.
In Ex Parte Steenkamp and Steenkamp, an important case in the South African law of succession, Mr. and Mrs. K. bequeathed a farm and certain movable property to their children born and to be born of their daughter. Their son-in-law subsequently murdered Mr. and Mrs. K.