Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, 7–2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failing to enforce a restraining order, which had led to the murders of a woman's three children by her estranged husband. [1]
The police protection provisions under Section 46 of the Children Act 1989 are sometimes called Police Protection Orders (PPOs). This is incorrect as the powers are carried out without approval by a court and therefore the police do not require a court order to proceed. [7] [8]
A Colorado Springs Police Department official told The Enquirer that police filed an Extreme Risk Protection Order against the man Wednesday. According to the department, the order is Colorado's ...
Such restraining order is valid for a period of ten days. In case that the threatened person files for court restraining order, the police restraining order remains valid until court renders decision. [35] A court may issue a domestic violence or stalking restraining order based on application of threatened person for a period of up to one month.
“A petitioner can go to court, circumvent the state’s attorney and law enforcement, file for that order of protection. The judge shall issue that order of protection. Law enforcement issues ...
Within hours of the law going into effect on Aug. 9, Bath police submitted an affidavit for a protective custody warrant for a 26-year-old man who officers said made multiple threats against them ...
The authority for use of police power under American Constitutional law has its roots in English and European common law traditions. [3] Even more fundamentally, use of police power draws on two Latin principles, sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas ("use that which is yours so as not to injure others"), and salus populi suprema lex esto ("the welfare of the people shall be the supreme law ...
The trial judges held that the police were under no specific legal duty to provide protection to the individual plaintiffs and dismissed the complaints. In a 2–1 decision, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals determined that Warren, Taliaferro, and Nichol were owed a special duty of care by the police department and reversed the trial ...