Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court on June 28, 2024, ruled in favor of a participant in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot who challenged his conviction for a federal obstruction crime.
Hughes Court (February 24, 1930 – June 30, 1941) Stone Court (July 3, 1941 – April 22, 1946) Vinson Court (June 24, 1946 – September 8, 1953) Warren Court (October 5, 1953 – June 23, 1969) Burger Court (June 23, 1969 – September 26, 1986) Rehnquist Court (September 26, 1986 – September 3, 2005) Roberts Court (September 29, 2005 ...
Revlon, Inc. v. MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc., 506 A.2d 173 (Delaware Supreme Court 1986) in certain limited circumstances indicating that the "sale" or "break-up" of the company is inevitable, the fiduciary obligation of the directors of a target corporation are narrowed significantly, the singular responsibility of the board being to ...
National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014) is a landmark judgement of the Supreme Court of India, which declared transgender people the 'third gender', affirmed that the fundamental rights granted under the Constitution of India will be equally applicable to them, and gave them the right to self-identification of their gender as male, female or third gender.
The US Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that President-elect Donald Trump can be sentenced Friday in his New York hush money case. The order states: The application for stay presented to Justice ...
The final judgement in the Ayodhya dispute was declared by the Supreme Court of India on 9 November 2019. [4] The Supreme Court ordered the disputed land (2.77 acres) to be handed over to a trust (to be created by the government of India) to build the Ram Janmabhoomi (revered as the birthplace of Hindu deity, Rama) temple.
Agreement with the Court's judgment does not guarantee agreement with the reasoning expressed in its opinion. A justice is not considered in agreement if they dissented even in part. Agreement percentages are based only on the listed cases in which a justice participated and are rounded to the nearest one-tenth of one percentage point.
Agreement with the Court's judgment does not guarantee agreement with the reasoning expressed in its opinion. A justice is not considered in agreement if they dissented even in part. Agreement percentages are based only on the listed cases in which a justice participated and are rounded to the nearest one-tenth of one percentage point.