Should the Supreme Court be televised?By Meghan SteinbeissAlternative Dispute Resolution, May 2012It is not probable that we will ever see the full operations of the Supreme Court as the Justices hold the final vote in whether or not their activities will be televised.
Supreme Court grants arbitrators more powerBy Joshua BaileyAlternative Dispute Resolution, October 2010Since Section 2 of the Federal Arbitration Act states that such clauses are “valid, irrevocable, and enforceable” without mentioning the validity of the agreement as a whole, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a challenge to the whole agreement must be decided by the arbitrator.
From the United States Supreme CourtBy Donald C. HudsonCriminal Justice, September 2000On October 13, 1995 an anonymous caller reported to the Miami-Dade Police that a young black male standing at a particular bus stop and wearing a plaid shirt was carrying a gun.
U.S. Supreme Court upholds Miranda warningsCorporate Law Departments, July 2000
In 1966 the Supreme Court published the landmark decision of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, which required law enforcement officers to give certain warnings before a suspect's statement made during custodial interrogation could be admitted in evidence.
Recent United States Supreme Court decisionsBy Mary Lee LeahyHuman and Civil Rights, February 2000I remember where I was--I was getting out of my car to go into the Illinois Supreme Court Library--when I heard on the radio that the court had decided Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44 (1996).
U.S. Supreme Court rules on new value (or does it?)By John C. MurrayCommercial Banking, Collections, and Bankruptcy, December 1999In an 8-1 opinion issued on May 3, 1999, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Bank of America National Trust & Savings Association v. 203 N. LaSalle Street Partnership, ___U.S.___, 119 S.Ct. 1141 (1999), that old equity holders were disqualified from participating in a "new value" bankruptcy reorganization plan over the objection of a senior class of impaired creditors, where the opportunity to contribute new capital and receive ownership interests in the reorganized entity was given exclusively to old equity holders without consideration of alternatives.
From the United States Supreme CourtBy Donald C. HudsonCriminal Justice, November 1999Accused's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses was violated by admitting into evidence at his trial a non-testifying accomplice's confession that contained some statements against the accomplice's penal interest and others that inculpated the accused.
From the United States Supreme CourtBy Donald C. HudsonCriminal Justice, July 1999Police officers may search a passenger's personal belongings inside an automobile when they have probable cause to believe the automobile contains contraband.
From the United States Supreme CourtBy Donald C. HudsonCriminal Justice, April 1999When police seize property for a criminal investigation, the due process clause does not require them to provide the owner with notice of state remedies for the return of the property seized.
U.S. Supreme Court rules that Daubert factors apply to all experts, not just scientistsBy Michael Todd ScottCorporate Law Departments, April 1999In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed the trial judge's role as a "gatekeeper" in regards to the admissibility of expert testimony and held that Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence governs the admissibility of novel scientific evidence.
From the United States Supreme CourtBy Donald C. HudsonCriminal Justice, February 1999Respondents and the lessee of an apartment were sitting in one of its rooms bagging cocaine.
