scholarly journals State Supreme Courts and the U.S. Supreme Court's Post-Miranda Rulings

1981 ◽  
Vol 72 (3) ◽  
pp. 886 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Gruhl
Keyword(s):  
State Supreme Courts ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
The U.S

scholarly journals THE NON-RECOGNITION OF ISLAMIC MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE

2012 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
John McDermott
Keyword(s):  
General Rule ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spousal Abuse ◽  
Muslim Country ◽  
State Supreme Courts ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
Polygamous Marriage ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Islamic Marriage ◽  
The U.S

The general rule regarding the validity of foreign marriages followed by most US courts is that a marriage if validly performed is valid everywhere. But there are exceptions based on public policy. Thus, while a non-incestuous, monogamous marriage performed in a Muslim country between consenting adults would be recognized in the United States, a polygamous marriage most likely will not. Bigamy is a crime in all states, although the husband is rarely prosecuted unless there are other factors, e.g., spousal abuse or fraud. The U.S. Constitution’s protection of an individual’s religious rights might be asserted as a basis for allowing Muslim men to have more than one wife but it seems unlikely to succeed as the Supreme Court rejected a similar argument in a case involving a Mormon man who had several wives as permitted by his religion. However, several state supreme courts have recently held that a State cannot constitutionally ban same sex marriages; this article explores the possibility that similar bans on polygamous marriage might be held to be unconstitutional. The article also explores the difficulties encountered in attempting to have a US court give effect to a Ṭalāq divorce, especially where the Ṭalāq is not confirmed by a court or other judicial body.

Courts Continue to Address the Wealth Disparity Issue

1989 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael W. La Morte
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
School Finance ◽  
Appellate Court ◽  
State Supreme Courts ◽  
State School ◽  
Educational Adequacy ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
School Finance Litigation ◽  
School Financing ◽  
The U.S

Lawsuits in nearly three dozen states have challenged the constitutionality of state school finance provisions on equal protection or educational adequacy grounds. Presently, the U.S. Supreme Court, a federal appellate court, and 10 state supreme courts have upheld state provisions, and 7 state supreme courts have held school financing provisions unconstitutional. Although wealth-related school finance litigation began in 1968 and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the issue in 1973, the judicial caldron continues to boil. Protracted rounds of litigation over the years in several states and a rash of recent suits reveal this issue to remain lively and contentious.

Protection Order Policy-making in the U.S. State Courts of Last Resort from 1980 to 2019

2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-91
Author(s):  
Andrea Barrick ◽  
John C. Kilwein
Keyword(s):  
State Government ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
State Courts ◽  
State Supreme Courts ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Government Ideology ◽  
Protection Order ◽  
The U.S

This article examines the development of policy designed to target intimate partner violence, or domestic violence, through the use of protection orders in the U.S. state courts of last resort, or the state supreme courts, from 1980 to 2019. The authors’ study shows that the American state supreme courts are decidedly supportive of female protection order litigants throughout the period studied. The model also highlights the importance of state government ideology, percentage of female justices, and state laws that ban gender hiring discrimination on state supreme court decision-making in these cases.

Malpractice & Negligence: State Supreme Courts Limit Therapists’ Duties to Third Parties

1999 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 204-205
Author(s):  
Megan Cleary
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Abuse ◽  
Child Sexual Abuse ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
New Hampshire ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
State Supreme Courts ◽  
Recovered Memories ◽  
Supreme Courts ◽  
Repressed Memory ◽  
University Of Colorado

In recent years, the law in the area of recovered memories in child sexual abuse cases has developed rapidly. See J.K. Murray, “Repression, Memory & Suggestibility: A Call for Limitations on the Admissibility of Repressed Memory Testimony in Abuse Trials,” University of Colorado Law Review, 66 (1995): 477-522, at 479. Three cases have defined the scope of liability to third parties. The cases, decided within six months of each other, all involved lawsuits by third parties against therapists, based on treatment in which the patients recovered memories of sexual abuse. The New Hampshire Supreme Court, in Hungerford v. Jones, 722 A.2d 478 (N.H. 1998), allowed such a claim to survive, while the supreme courts in Iowa, in J.A.H. v. Wadle & Associates, 589 N.W.2d 256 (Iowa 1999), and California, in Eear v. Sills, 82 Cal. Rptr. 281 (1991), rejected lawsuits brought by nonpatients for professional liability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document