Evidence of accomplice: An Introduction Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act‚ 1872 is the only absolute rule of law dealing with accomplice evidence. However it is the opinion of some that this section is redundant as Section 118 makes all persons competent to testify except those persons which the section specifically bars. Moreover there is no rule which requires that the evidence of an accomplice should be corroborated. But Section 133 might lead persons to suppose that the Legislature desired
Premium Evidence law Law
Caleb Duncan 02/17/2011 JULIA M. O’ROURKE‚ Plaintiff‚ Appellee‚ v. CITY OF PROVIDENCE‚ Defendant‚ Appellant. 07-14-1997 Issue: Plaintiff was a fire fighter for the City of Providence from 1992 to June 30‚ 1995. Plaintiff filed a five count complaint asserting hostile work environment and R.I. Gen. Law 28-5-24.1 (Rhode Island Fair Employment Practices Act); and disparate treatment. She also alleged violation of her equal rights and sought damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983. Facts: Until
Premium Complaint Plaintiff Defendant
U.S. 602 (1971) The Facts: Pennsylvania and Rhode Island had statutes that allowed the state to pay for parts of non-secular‚ non-public education such as teachers instructional materials‚ salaries‚ and textbooks for religious subjects. The appellants in Pennsylvania believed that this was violating the separation of church and state described in the First Amendment. In the Rhode Island case‚ the appellees sued to have the statute in question declared unconstitutional by arguing that it violated
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution United States
Galit [GR 51770‚ 20 March 1985] Facts: In August 23‚ 1977‚ Mrs. Natividad Fernando was found dead in her bedroom as a result of 7 wounds inflicted in her body. More than 2 weeks thereafter‚ the police authorities of Montalban picked up defendant-appellant‚ Francisco Galit on suspicion of the murder on the occasion of a robbery. When the case was referred to the NBI‚ NBI Agent Flores conducted a preliminary interview of the suspect who allegedly gave evasive answers to his questions. The following
Premium Question Crime Law
wants the court to grant the equitable remedy of specific performance because monetary damages are inadequate in this situation. e) If the trial court finds in Rabe’s favor and Sanchez appeals the decision to a higher court‚ Sanchez would be the appellant (petitioner) and Rabe would be the appellee (respondent). 2. Answer the following questions based on the scenario in Question & Case Problem #4-1 (p. 90). a) Explain the purpose of the Commerce Clause. Congress has often used the Commerce Clause
Premium Law Judicial remedies Injunction
Citation: Nasc Services‚ Inc v. Jervis 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40502 (U.S. Dist. Ct. D. N.J. 2008) Parties: * Plaintiff – Nasc Services and Russell * Defendant – Jervis‚ Moses‚ Jones‚ Barrow‚ Moffett‚ and Nee * Appellant – N/A * Appellee– N/A History: The plaintiff motioned against the defendants under the notion that they violated a covenant in their employee contracts. If the defendants were to be found guilty then the consequences would be an oppressive and unfair scenario
Premium Legal terms Defendant Plaintiff
HARISHANKAR BAGLA V. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (Project towards partial fulfilment of the assessment in the subject of Administrative Law) Submitted by: Submitted to: Vaibhav Singh‚ Mr. I.P. Massey Roll no. 781 Faculty of Law Semester VI National Law University‚ Jodhpur Winter Session (January-May 2013) TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 TABLE OF CASES i i 1. INTRODUCTION
Premium Law Administrative law Legislature
Employee Discipline & Grievance Handling Submitted To: Manas Ranjan Tripathy 2011-2013 Submitted By : Afreen Khan Neha Gupta Poonam Bharti Urvashi Duggal Contents Employee Discipline: ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Objectives of Discipline ................................................................................................................................. 2 Causes
Premium Management Employment Discipline
ADELFA PROPERTIES‚ INC.‚ petitioner‚ vs. COURT OF APPEALS‚ ROSARIO JIMENEZ-CASTAÑEDA and SALUD JIMENEZ‚ respondents.1 G.R. No. 111238 January 25‚ 1995 REGALADO‚ J.: The main issues presented for resolution in this petition for review on certiorari of the judgment of respondent Court of appeals‚ dated April 6‚ 1993‚ in CA-G.R. CV No. 34767 1 are (1) whether of not the "Exclusive Option to Purchase" executed between petitioner Adelfa Properties‚ Inc. and private respondents Rosario Jimenez-Castañeda
Premium Contract
Darlene Jespersen‚ Plaintiff-Appellant‚ v. Harrah’s Operating Company‚ INC.‚ Defendant-Appellee United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit April 14‚ 2006 Facts: Darlene Jespersen was a bartender at Harrah’s Casino in Reno in the sports bar. She was frequently praised by her supervisors and customers for being an outstanding employee. When Jespersen first started her job at Harrah’s the female bartenders were not required to wear makeup but were encouraged to. Jespersen tried to wear
Premium Appeal Civil procedure United States