Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
One is the "Consent to Search" law which requires an officer to inform someone they have the right to deny a search and to make sure that person understands that right. The other is the "NYPD ID" law, which requires the officer, in certain situations, to hand out business cards with their name, rank, badge number and command.
Illinois v. Rodriguez (1990) - search valid if police reasonably believe consent given by owner; Florida v. Bostick (1991) - not "free to leave" but "free to decline" on bus; Florida v. Jimeno (1991) - can request officer to limit scope of search; Ohio v. Robinette (1996) - do not have to inform motorist is free to go; United States v.
Demeter's Manual of Parliamentary Law and Procedure states that requests for any unallowable purpose need unanimous consent, and a single objection defeats consent, unless the organization's laws or the assembly's usual practices allow otherwise. An example might be a request to have a nonmember address the body.
Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218 (1973), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that ruled that in a case involving a consent search, although knowledge of a right to refuse consent is a factor in determining whether a grant of consent to a search was voluntary, the state does not need to prove that the person who granted consent to search knew of the right to refuse consent under the Fourth ...
The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) was a law passed by the United States Congress in 1974 and codified as Title 12, Chapter 27 of the United States Code, 12 U.S.C. §§ 2601–2617.
Illinois v. Rodriguez, 497 U.S. 177 (1990), is a U.S. Supreme Court case dealing with the issue of whether a warrantless search conducted pursuant to third party consent violates the Fourth Amendment when the third party does not actually possess common authority over the premises.
Investing in a real estate investment trust (REIT) is a way to profit from the real estate market without having to buy a house or worry about screening tenants, fixing damages, chasing down late ...
Other examples would be real estate contracts, lawyer contracts, etc. When a contract is entered into without the free consent of the party, it is considered a voidable contract. The definition of the act states that a voidable contract is enforceable by law at the option of one or more parties but not at option of the other parties.