Mapp v. Ohio (1962) i. Plaintiff‚ Dollree Mapp‚ was illegally raided by Cleveland police. After receiving information that an individual‚ wanted in connection with a recent bombing‚ was hiding in Mapp’s house‚ the Cleveland police knocked on her door and demanded entrance. On the other hand‚ the defendant was the state of Ohio. The police were looking for a bombing suspect and during the search found a gun and obscene literature. ii. On May 23‚ 1957‚ police officers in Cleveland‚ Ohio believed that
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Exclusionary rule Police
HOUSE RULES 8 RULE 1 8 RULE 2 8 RULE 3 9 STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF EACH RULE 9 RULE 1: 9 Strength 9 Weakness 9 RULE 2: 9 Strength 9 Weakness 10 RULE 3: 10 Strength 10 Weakness 10 BIBLIOGRAPHY 11 Commercial Bank of Australia Ltd. V. Amadio [1983] HCA 14 Question 1- Ratio-Three Levels of Generality Broad level of Generality: Where a party enters into an agreement with another party and takes an unfair advantage of the situation by failing to disclose anything which has taken
Premium Common law Contract Bank
GENERAL DUTY OF CARE 3 3.0 SUMMARY OF CASE “DONOGHUE V STEVENSON” 3 3.1 ACTIONS TAKEN BY DONOGHUE 4 3.2 THE RESPONSE OF MR. STEVENSON 5 4.0 THE IMPLICATION OF CASE 5 5.0 THE JUDGEMENT 6 6.0 THE CONCLUSION 7 7.0 REFERENCES 8 1.0 INTRODUCTION Introduction to students the Lord Atkin’s concept of general duty of care‚ summary of the case “Donoghue v Stevenson” and its implication. It will also briefly
Premium Duty of care Tort Law
TENNESSEE v. Cleamtee GARNER‚ et al. 471 U.S. 1‚ 105 S. Ct 1694‚ 85 L.Ed.2d 1 Argued Oct. 30‚ 1984 Decided March 27‚ 1985 A case in which the court ruled that a Tennessee “fleeing felon” law was unconstitutional because it legalize the use of deadly force by police when a suspect poses no immediate threat to the police or others. The court ruled that the use of deadly force was a Fourth Amendment seizure issue subject to a finding of “ reasonableness.” Father‚ whose unarmed son was shot
Premium Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Police Tennessee v. Garner
Abortion The U.S. Supreme Court declared abortion to be a “fundamental right” guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution in the 1973 abortion case Roe v. Wade (www.abortionprocon.org). This ruling was based on the Constitution giving “a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy‚” and also “This right to privacy… is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.” The U.S. abortion debate has raged on ever since this decision‚ making it a huge religious‚ political
Premium Abortion Pregnancy Fetus
1. Caption and Procedural History Marbury v. Madison‚ Supreme Court of the United States‚ 1803 Justice Marshall wrote the majority opinion; he was joined by Paterson‚ Chase‚ and Washington. Justice Cushing and Moore did not participate. This case was originally tried in the Supreme Court of the Unites States. Marbury requested the Supreme the Court issue a writ of mandamus to compel James Madison to deliver the commissions issued by former President John Adams. 2. Facts Just before finishing
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Marbury v. Madison
Chapter 11 R.J smith Gibbons v Ogden This case involved New York trying to grant a monopoly on waterborne trade between New York and New Jersey. Judge Marshal‚ of the Supreme Court‚ sternly reminded the state of New York that the Constitution gives Congress alone the control of interstate commerce. Marshal’s decision‚ in 1824‚ was a major blow on states’ rights. John C. Calhoun John C. Calhoun was part of the New Southern Congress of 1811. He was a representative for South Carolina and one
Premium Martin Van Buren Andrew Jackson
Name: |Date: | |Graded Assignment Korematsu v. the United States (1944) Use the background information and the primary sources in the Graded Assignment: Primary Sources sheet to answer the following questions. (2 points) |Score | | | 1. What did Fred T. Korematsu do that resulted in his arrest and conviction? Answer: (2 points) |Score | | | 2. According to the first paragraph from the excerpts
Premium United States
Henry V – William Shakespeare There can be little doubt that Shakespeare intended to present his protagonist in “Henry V” as the popular hero-king. His efforts are mainly concentrated on the portraiture of this “star of England”‚ King Henry‚ whom he deliberately chose out of the page of history as the finest representative of the best distinctive type of English character. He wanted his play to lead triumphantly to an English victory against overwhelming odds at Agincourt. What is not agreed among
Premium Henry VI of England Henry V of England Henry IV of England
Federal District Court under the Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. Title IX gives students protection against having natural rights violated while in school. Because of that‚ Franklin requested that monetary restitution be paid for the abuse and harassment during school. The district court decided to drop the case‚ because Title IX does not authorize a “monetary” reward for damages. Franklin didn’t stop there. She took her case to the United States Supreme Court‚ and asked for an
Premium High school Supreme Court of the United States Marbury v. Madison