Respondents respectfully continues the request that this action be transferred to the Superior Court of NameofCounty, for the South District which is located in Corona, California, Respondents' city of residence. According to the California Code of Civil Procedure: For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought. Civ. Proc. Code § 397(c) While Petitioner might argue that the existing venue is more convenient for Petitioner, Petitioner is a member of the United States Armed Forces with extensive resources.
/ Case No. : 6:12−cv−02072−AA PRO BONO APPOINTMENT RESPONSE FORM In response to the Court's Order Appointing Pro Bono Counsel, I hereby certify that: Representation of Michael W. Haliburton for all purposes is accepted. If appropriate, a Substitution of Counsel will be filed to designate the responsible attorney continuing as counsel of record. Termination of this appointment is requested based on the following conflict of interest: No conflict of interest exists. However, termination of this appointment is requested for the following reason(s): DATED this day of .
Student1: Public schools may not sponsor, supervise, conduct, or encourage any Student to lead, conduct or recite bible readings, religious Invocations or other religious ceremonies in any school activity. Student2: A student's parent whose name was Jaffree sued alleging that this law violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because it forced students to pray and basically exposed them to religious indoctrination Student1: Jaffree decided to file this suit after his three children reported that their teachers had led prayers in school. Student2: Jaffree claimed that the 1981 and 1982 Alabama statutes on prayer in public schools violated the establishment clause of the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Student1: According to the Court, this was a clear violation of the 1st Amendment's establishment clause Student2: The majority of people believed that the law is in violation of the First Amendment and must be overturned. Teacher: Who was Wallace? Student1: Wallace was the governor of Alabama at that time Student2: As the case was going on, Jaffree's children were excluded and ridiculed by classmates because of their father's opposition to school prayer.
LILES v. DAMON CORPORATION (CC 033086; CA A129113; SC S054734) Facts: Before DE MUNIZ, Chief Justice, and GILLETTE, DURHAM, BALMER, KISTLER, and WALTERS, Justices. Gary E. Norman, Albany, argued the cause and filed the brief for petitioners on review. William A. Drew, of Elliott, Ostrander and Preston PC, Portland, argued the cause and filed the briefs for respondent on review. Brian S. Camp, of Brian S. Camp, PC, Portland, filed the brief for amicus curiae Oregon Trial Lawyers Association.
After the defendant receives the Summons, he or she will send an answer. The response will deal with each paragraph in the complaint. A counterclaim can be filed by the defendant if he or she has their own claim against the plaintiff. If there is a counterclaim filed the plaintiff may react by organizing a “Reply.” The Reply will “admit,” “deny,” or emphasize that the plaintiff deficient amount of information, just as the original answer did The second stage in the civil suit is Fact-Finding and Discovery. Federal court system requires disclosure of all pertinent information and documents to the other side prior.
Thus in a effort to prevent immigration laws from producing excessively harsh effects, Congress implemented provisions in the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act) under which the Attorney General may, at his discretion, suspend an alien’s deportation. 8 U.S.C §§ 1254(a)(1) (…the Attorney General may, in his discretion, suspend deportation…). This discretion comes at a high burden for the alien. The burden is on the alien to prove that deportation will result
Sue Davies Pol 201 Oct 1, 2012 Habeas Corpus The meaning of Habeas Corpus in the Constitution is simply this: Habeas corpus, a Latin term Meaning "you have the body," refers to the right of every prisoner to challenge the terms of his or her incarceration in court before a judge.1.. This term has taken on a whole new urgency since the post 9/11 taking of potential prisoners to Guantamano Bay . It is called Gitmo and has sparked many debates about the rights of prisoners of war. I would like to show that the holding of the prisoners at Gitmo is a legal and viable idea. The Habeas Corpus term comes from an old English work to mean to produce a body; This means to have viable evidence and a person to show as a prisoner.
House of Representative Executive Document No. 5, suspension of the write of habeas corpus letter from the Attorney General, transmitting in answer to a resolution of the House of the 12th instant, and opinion relative to the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. 12. Lincoln's Suspension of Habeas Corpus as Viewed by Congress Part 2, Sellery, George Bulletin of The University of Wisconsin 149, History Series, Vol. 1, 1907 13.
Re: Mr. Andrew Carter Sterilization of Anne Carter Facts: Issue: Under what circumstances is sterilization of a minor legal in N.J? Discussion: It is a very tight line that we will ride when litigating this case, if we go to trial. There are many courts that have decided against doing this type of procedure. “The court held the right to the sterilized is included in the privacy rights of the federal and state constitutions (more specifically the right to reproductive autonomy). The court then went on to explain that because this constitutional right is personal to the individual, the Court through its parens patriae power must see to it that the right is protected.
The case of Laporte involves kettling which is determined as the containment of crowds of demenstrators within a limited area. It is a controversial police tactic and its lawfulness has been the subject of several appellate court decisions. The starting point for an analysis of kettling is Art 5 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998). This provides a right not to be deprived of liberty in certain situations and is an absolute right. On the face of it, the containment of demonstrators would appear to be a clear breach of Art 5, however the courts have now focused on the exceptional circumstances in which the state will have lawful justification to employ the tactic.