| No limitation for use of stamp paper | Posted on 14 April 2008 by Prakash Yedhula | CourtSupreme Court of IndiaBriefNo impediment for a stamp paper purchased more than six months prior to the proposed date of execution‚ being used for a documentCitationJudgementIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Writ Petition (Civil) No. 290 of 2001 Decided On: 19.02.2008 Appellants: Thiruvengada Pillai Vs. Respondent: Navaneethammal and Anr. Hon’ble Judges: R.V. Raveendran and P. Sathasivam‚ JJ. Counsels:
Premium Appellate court Appeal Supreme court
On 12/03/2015 at 1035 hours‚ Detective John Reynolds with the Great Bend Police Department and myself had Kerry J. Partridge brought over from the Barton County Jail‚ for an interview. Partridge was taken into the interview room in the Detectives Office‚ in reference to cases that the Great Bend Police Department and the Barton County Sheriff Office was working. At 1045 hours Detective Reynolds read Partridge his Miranda Warning ‚ and had Partridge sign his initial rights form. Partridge said‚ yes
Premium Crime Police Supreme Court of the United States
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Sr. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Abbreviated Forms FDI AIR SC SCC Edn. v. Pg. Hon‟ble Art. UOI Vol. U.S.A. Full Forms Foreign Direct Investment All India Reporter Supreme Court Supreme Court Cases Edition Versus Pages Honourable Article Union of India Volume United State of America MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER Page 2 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES BOOKS REFERRED: 1. Jain M.P.‚ Indian Constitutional Law‚ (Nagpur: LexisNexis Butterworths
Premium India Constitution of India Human rights
Introduction There have been many Supreme Court cases that dealed with many concepts of the law‚ like obscenity for example. As a matter of fact‚ obscenity is a concept that Miller v. California deals with. To be more specific‚ this case deals with what is considered obscene‚ and if the specific obscenity mentioned in this case is protected by the first amendment‚ the freedom of speech. I will now explain this case in more depth. What brought this case about? In 1973‚ Marvin Miller
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Obscenity Supreme Court of the United States
possibility that Franklin was turning into a dictatorship by attempting to seize control of the Supreme Court in the Court-packing. This would later be known as The Court- Packing Scandal‚ President Franklin D. Roosevelt wanted to increase the size of the Supreme Court as well as bring in new justices who would contradict and throw off the opinion on the Court. Franklin Roosevelt anticipated to pack the Court‚ on a case where conservative justices were there to speak out on account‚ the New Deal‚ unconstitutional
Premium Franklin D. Roosevelt New Deal Social Security
1ST SLIDE: Identity theft starts with the misuse of a person’s personally identifying information‚ such as name and Social Security number‚ credit card numbers or other financial account information. For identity thieves‚ this information is as good as gold. 2ND SLIDE: What do thieves do with a stolen identity? Once they have your personal information‚ identity thieves use it in a variety of ways. Credit card fraud: They may open new credit card accounts in their victim’s name. When they
Premium Identity theft Credit card fraud
Constitution allowed Congress to establish the National Bank. The Court also asserted that the Constitution did not allow a state to tax the Bank. Chief Justice John Marshall stated that the Constitution does not explicitly grant Congress the right to establish a national bank‚ but also noted that the "necessary and proper" clause of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to do that which they felt was best for the country. Therefore‚ the Court affirmed the existence of implied powers. In 1791‚ after
Premium United States Constitution United States Congress Supreme Court of the United States
Most people inhibit morals and hold different classes of ethics‚ which plays heavily in choosing between right and wrong or fair and unfair. These decisions grow more difficult as time goes on. When considering which Supreme Court case I wanted to research‚ the thought of picking the death penalty topic originally swayed me. I did not want to pick such a controversial subject‚ but I grew more and more intrigued as I read deeper into the case of Gregg vs. Georgia in 1976. The case stirred up many
Premium Gregg v. Georgia Capital punishment Supreme Court of the United States
commonly known and is no secret that case volumes in court have increased among with crime due to the constant new laws being created‚ the lack of fear from the criminals and in some occasions the lack of procedure knowledge from the community with possible offenders. I’ve seen many cases that could be resolved with the appropriate guidance without the need to visit a court room. In occasions unnecessary complains contribute to case overloads. Court judges in occasion recur to sending these cases for
Free Crime Criminal justice Victim
Briefly describe the specifics of patent ‘056 described in Exhibit 1 and the various court decisions around the State Street Bank & Trust Co. vs. Signature Financial Group Inc. The Issue of this case was to determine whether or not Signature ’s claimed invention the “056 Patent”‚ a data processing system‚ is drawn to statutory subject topic under 35 U.S.C 101. The Court ruling holds that the ’056 Patent is directed to non-statutory subject matter under 35 U.S.C 101 and is
Premium Patent Law United States