Search

Copyright of Justicia is the property of Libreria Bosch, S.L. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article explores the challenges faced by defendants in anti-SLAPP lawsuits, which aim to protect free speech. The laws vary across states, and federal courts have been inconsistent in their application of these laws. This inconsistency creates uncertainty for defendants and may discourage individuals from exercising their constitutional rights. The article suggests that a federal anti-SLAPP law could provide more consistent and effective protection in federal court. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Justicia is the property of Libreria Bosch, S.L. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Discusses the release of Justice Thurgood Marshall's papers which revealed that the U.S. court justices rarely communicate in writing about the substance of their work. Indication that judges are content to join their opinions and dissents without requesting any substantive changes at all; Lack of intellectual debate in the courts; Internal pressure among justices to join a majority opinion; Marshall's habit of delegating virtually all of his writing to his clerks; Decrease in the number of cases accepted for review in the 1980s; Implications of the findings for law and the administration of justice.

In this paper, the author seeks to explain to lawyers other than from a common law background the approach of English courts to the authoritative impact of previous decisions ('precedents' if a first sense), an approach which English law has famously (or notoriously) set in the framework of the 'doctrine of precedent' by which previous decisions can bind subsequent courts ('precedent' in a second sense). In order to do so, the author first sets this doctrine in the context of certain particular features of the wider legal system (the constitutional position of judges, the relationship between statute and the common law, the unity of English judicial institutions and the relative roles of judges and the parties). The author then describes the formal doctrine of precedent but then seeks to explain the use of earlier authority by modern English judges, illustrating this by reference to the recent decision of the House of Lords in Shogun Finance Ltd v Hudson. The picture which emerges is much more complex than the formal doctrine suggests: rather than following previous decisions in a mechanistic way, English judges engage closely with the variety of approaches, techniques, principles and considerations which they find in earlier judgments, and they evaluate the substantive arguments which these address. In all this, they are willing to innovate, though they are also conscious of the practical and constitutional limitations on judicial law-making. In a final part of the paper, the author considers whether English judges extend their treatment of common law cases to decisions of the European Court of Justice or the European Court of Human Rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Justicia is the property of Libreria Bosch, S.L. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Presents information on a session of the court of San Miguel county. Description of the case of San Miguel county against Carl C. Magee, editor of the New Mexico State Tribune; Charges of contempt of court; Need for evidence to prove the defendant guilty for contempt of court; Punishment to Magee by sending him to San Miguel county jail; Views on an executive pardon sent by the adjutant general; Memorandum from the governor ordering the sheriff to release Carl Magee from custody; Release of Magee after payment of $2,500 bond; Decision on charges of contempt of court is to be made by the Supreme Court.

Copyright of European Review of Private Law is the property of Kluwer Law International and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Courts are "entangle" in attempts to delay vote, Kenyatta says Chief Justice David Maraga responded by insisting the judiciary is independent, while the Law Society of Kenya described Kenyatta's comments as "alarming". [Extracted from the article]

Criticizes the refusal of the U.S. Supreme Court to review the dismissal of William Soler from the Philadelphia school system for incompetence in 1962. Implication of the case for the issue of federal constitutional rights to due process and impartiality of judgment; Background of the case; Speculation about the reason behind the refusal of the Supreme Court to review the case; Similarity of the case with the Supreme Court case Beilan versus Board of Education; Opinion on the role of emotion in judicial decisions.

Copyright of Justicia is the property of Libreria Bosch, S.L. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article focuses on the justice related concern and issues and the role of in-house counsel community to promote the use of judicial resources, and to collaborate on the sound administration of justice. Topics discussed include to access justice concern and issues, a judgment from the Supreme Court of Canada in 2014 in the Hryniak v. Mauldin court case, the new Code of Civil Procedure and 2015 year-end report on the Federal Judiciary.

The article provides information on a discussion on how advances in neuroscience pose new challenges for the judicial system. This discussion also included the topics on the role of neuroscience in determining legal policies and judgments, innovative brain-based treatments for certain pathological behavior and how the judicial system is easily fooled by colorful brain scans.

In an unprecedented public attack on legal failures, Sir James Munby, a British High Court judge, last week called for sweeping changes, particularly in regard to divorced fathers' contact with their children. His criticism, supported privately by many of his colleagues, comes at a time when aggrieved fathers throughout the western world are rising up to demand fairer treatment. In certain Scandinavian countries and some American states, there is now an automatic presumption of joint residency for children of divorced or separated couples, allowing them to spend equal time with both parents. But in Britain, as in most other west European countries, the scales are still heavily skewed toward the mother. The way English courts deal with contact applications could be in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights, guaranteeing the right to respect for family life, the right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time, and the enforcement of court orders, Munby suggested. Lord Filkin, the family-justice minister, has promised a discussion paper on child-custody disputes in the summer.

Copyright of European Review of Private Law is the property of Kluwer Law International and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article seeks to refute the notion that the United States has exercised capital punishment on innocent victims in large numbers. However it is clearly stated there were mistakes in taking the decisions related to capital punishment. There is a reasonable amount of consideration that the jury makes related to witnesses and even independent observers before giving a verdict on such type of punishment. Furthermore, there is a decent evidence that the judicial system of the U.S. has not exercised capital punishment on innocent victims. INSET: Justice by quota, by J. Daryl Charles.

Criticizes the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the California Communist cases on June 17, 1957. Implication of the decision written by Chief Justice Earl Warren for the function of Congress in investigating Communist cases; Background of the Kilbourn versus Thompson case in which the decision was based; Way in which Congress could institute an inquiry into how the Supreme Court has become indulgent toward persons associated with Communism.

Comments on the introduction of a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives by Edward Koch and six co-sponsors to allow federal judges to award a reasonable attorney's fee to criminal defendants who are not convicted. Decision whether to award a fee to be up to the trial judge and subject to appellate review; Factors to consider such as the amount of money the defendant had to pay for his legal defense, the strength of the government's case and whether the defendant avoided conviction only on a technicality; Author's view on the reasons the bill has merit.

The article focuses on the differences in U.S. court decisions between the Burger court and Warren court. It says that Warren court establishes decisions that expect abuses by police and other authorities, while Burger court trusts authority. It says that Warren court mandates that a suspect must be given a lawyer but the Burger Court contends that a suspect can only get a lawyer after it has been indicted. Moreover, Burger court ruled that vagrancy statutes are unconstitutionally vague.

The article presents an interview with Richard Posner, a judge in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago. Discussed are technology's impact on how he does his work, using laptop computers and e-mail, his daily work schedule, weblogs, and hearing six cases a day when court is in session.

The article focuses on the seizing of control on justice system by legislators and the increasing number of legislative attacks in Florida. It further states that such attack includes judicial selection, decision-making and administration of courts. It then focuses on influence of legislators in judicial elections, proposals for court reform and in the process of merit selection. It also discusses the ballot measures and constitutional amendments placed by citizen group and related issues.

The article suggests tips for athletics directors to get most out of legal decisions. It cites the three branches of the government involved in making a law, such as the Congress, the president, and the courts and administrative bodies. Elements of a case are explained, including recitation of facts and making a decision on the case. Strategies to maximize comprehension include testing the logic of the case, engaging with the text, and establishing context.

Informs that the U.S. Congress is backing a civil rights bill which would prohibit discrimination by race, color or creed in the sale or rent of any building. Invalidation of the Proposition 14 by the State Court on the grounds that the Proposition is in effect the denial, without due process, of rights of those minorities; Support by the Congress to protect Mrs. Murphy, which is the code name for a retired lady living anywhere who has five rooms to rent in her little boarding house, wants internal harmony, and therefore seeks homogeneous clients; Opinion of judges of the Supreme Court that no man has the right to determine the conditions under which another man can sell or dispose of his own property.