Bankruptcy. Jurisdiction of Federal Courts. Power of the Directors of a Corporation to File a Voluntary Petition after the Appointment of a Receiver by the State Court

1921 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 201
Keyword(s):  
Federal Courts ◽  
The State ◽  
State Court

Stemming the Tide: Assisted Suicide and the Constitution

1995 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 389-397 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl H. Coleman ◽  
Tracy E. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
State Level ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
The State ◽  
Equal Protection ◽  
State Court ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Equal Protection Clause ◽  
The Right

On November 8, 1994, Oregon became the first state in the nation to legalize assisted suicide. Passage of Proposition 16 was a milestone in the campaign to make assisted suicide a legal option. The culmination of years of effort, the Oregon vote followed on the heels of failed referenda in California and Washington, and other unsuccessful attempts to enact state laws guaranteeing the right to suicide assistance. Indeed, in 1993, four states passed laws strengthening or clarifying their ban against assisted suicide. No doubt, Proposition 16 is likely to renew the effort to legalize assisted suicide at the state level.The battle over assisted suicide is also unfolding in the courts. Litigation challenging Proposition 16 on the grounds that it violates the equal protection clause is ongoing in Oregon. More significantly, three cases, two in federal courts and one in Michigan state court, have been brought to establish assisted suicide as a constitutionally protected right.

scholarly journals The Constitutional Power and Relation of the State and Federal Courts

1909 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 165
Author(s):  
J. C. Pritchard
Keyword(s):  
Federal Courts ◽  
The State

The Other Muslim Bans

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-38
Author(s):  
Will Smiley
Keyword(s):  
Security Policy ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
State Court ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
Muslim Majority

This Article addresses and critiques the case for state-level legislative bans on courts citing “Islamic law” or the law of Muslim-majority countries. In particular, the Article reviews the most substantive evidence adduced by the bans’ supporters, in the form of a set of state court cases published by the Center for Security Policy (CSP). Very few of these cases, in fact, show courts actually applying Islamic or foreign law, and in none of these cases would the various forms of proposed legislation have been likely to alter the result. Thus even this report does not suggest a need for the state laws purporting to ban sharīʿa. The Article thus argues that even if these bans are not unconstitutionally discriminatory in their effect, they are ineffective at achieving their claimed purpose. This Article was originally published as an Occasional Paper in the Harvard Papers in Islamic Law series in 2018.

PENYELESAIAN GANTI RUGI AKIBAT SENGKETA PENGUASAAN HAK ATAS TANAH SECARA MELAWAN HUKUM (Tinjauan Beberapa Kasus di Pengadilan Negeri Surakarta)

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 68
Author(s):  
Ananda Dwinanti Kinasih , ◽  
M. Hudi Asrori S ,
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Land Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
State Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Analytical Technique ◽  
Legal Force

<p>Abstract<br />This article aims for reviewing how the settlement of compensation as the consequences of the tenure <br />of land rights unlawfully in civil law Surakarta state court verdict number 106/pdt.g/2017/PN.SKT and <br />number 103/pdt.G/2006/PN.SKT where the court’s decision has a permanent legal force. This research is <br />a juridical normative legal research. The location of this research at Notary Office and PPAT Adib Sujarwadi <br />and the State Court Surakarta Class 1A Specific. Kinds and the sources of data in this research are <br />consist of primary data and secondary data. The technique of data collection through interview and library <br />study. The analytical technique used by the author is by the method of syllogism that uses the deduction <br />mindset. Regarding the settlement of compensation due to unlawful tenure of land rights is a compensatory <br />damages, in the form of payment to the victim amounting to a loss that is actually experienced. Based on <br />the decision of the Panel of Judges. Regarding the non-granting of immaterial compensation because <br />the Plaintiff does not attach the appropriate evidence. After the verdict is declared incracht, outside the <br />court, the Defendant and the Plaintiff may hold deliberations to determine the amount of the indemnity or <br />the Plaintiff waived the indemnity obligation, but the Defendant must leave the land of the object of the <br />dispute voluntarily. In the case of still occupy it will be executed by the bailiff from the Court.<br />Keywords: Compensation; Tort; Tenure Of Land Rights.</p><p>Abstrak<br />Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji bagaimana penyelesaian ganti rugi akibat penguasaan hak atas <br />tanah secara melawan hukum pada perkara perdata Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Surakarta Nomor 106/<br />Pdt.G/2017/PN SKT dan Nomor 103/Pdt.G/2006/PN SKT, dimana putusan pengadilan tersebut telah <br />berkekuatan hukum tetap. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif yuridis. Lokasi penelitian <br />yaitu di Kantor Notaris dan PPAT Adib Sujarwadi dan Pengadilan Negeri Surakarta Kelas IA Khusus. Jenis <br />dan sumber data penelitian ini meliputi data primer dan data sekunder. Teknik pengumpulan data melalui <br />wawancara dan studi kepustakaan. Teknik analisis yang digunakan oleh penulis adalah dengan metode <br />silogisme yang menggunakan pola pikir deduksi. Penyelesaian ganti rugi akibat penguasaan hak atas <br />tanah secara melawan hukum yaitu dengan ganti rugi kompensasi, berupa pembayaran kepada korban <br />sebesar kerugian yang benar-benar dialami. Berdasarkan keputusan Majelis Hakim. Mengenai tidak <br />dikabulkannya ganti rugi immateriil dikarenakan Penggugat tidak melampirkan bukti-bukti yang sesuai. <br />Setelah putusan dinyatakan incraht, di luar pengadilan, Tergugat dan Penggugat dapat mengadakan <br />musyawarah untuk menentukan jumlah ganti rugi atau Penggugat membebaskan kewajiban pembayaran <br />ganti rugi, namun Tergugat harus meninggalkan tanah obyek sengketa secara sukarela. Dalam hal masih <br />tetap menempati maka akan dilakukan eksekusi oleh juru sita dari Pengadilan.<br />Kata Kunci : Ganti Kerugian; Perbuatan Melawan Hukum; Penguasaan Hak Atas Tanah.</p>

scholarly journals New Jersey’s Zoning Amendment

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 28
Author(s):  
Alex Costin
Keyword(s):  
New Jersey ◽  
The State ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Political Elite ◽  
State Court ◽  
The People ◽  
Town Meeting ◽  
The Press ◽  
Growth And Change ◽  
The Town

A half century before the New Jersey Supreme Court endorsed inclusionary zoning in Southern Burlington N.A.A.C.P. v. Mount Laurel Township, the state struggled to secure basic municipal zoning. While New Jersey’s political elite embraced zoning in the 1910s and 20s to weather a period of tremendous growth and change, a disapproving judiciary steadfastly maintained that the practice violated basic property rights. Hundreds of state court decisions in the 1920s held zoning ordinances unconstitutional. Finally, the people of New Jersey in 1927 overwhelmingly passed an amendment to the state constitution overruling those decisions and affirming zoning as a reasonable exercise of the state’s police power. This essay traces those uncertain early years of zoning in New Jersey. The amendment was not the result of a state monolithically coming to its senses. Instead, its passage documents a decade-long struggle played out not only in the courts and legislature but also in the press and the town meeting.

Introduction: The Desegregation Dilemma

1995 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Armor
Keyword(s):  
School Districts ◽  
School Choice ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Civil Rights Movement ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
State Court ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
State Constitutions ◽  
Current Events ◽  
The City

Despite nearly four decades of controversy and debate over school segregation, the desegregation dilemma is still largely unresolved. The “busing” problem has received less national attention in recent years, and there are no riots, bus burnings, and school boycotts, as witnessed in earlier decades. Yet current events reveal the depth of a dilemma that has divided educators, parents, jurists, social scientists, and many other groups since the beginning of the civil rights movement. Indicators of the current desegregation dilemma are numerous. Hundreds of school districts throughout the country still impose busing for desegregation purposes, many under court orders that are now more than twenty years old. Although the types of desegregation plans have evolved to some extent, with increased emphasis on school choice, many plans still compel children to attend schools that their parents would not choose, solely for the purpose of racial “balance.” Further, after a period of quiescence, school desegregation was again the subject of several major Supreme Court decisions in 1991 and 1992. The decisions affected the length of time and the conditions under which a school district has to maintain a court-ordered busing plan. Although these decisions dispelled a common misconception that school systems have to maintain desegregation plans “in perpetuity,” it is still unclear how many school districts can or will end their busing plans. Finally, new desegregation litigation and controversies continue to surface. In 1989 a lawsuit was initiated in a Connecticut state court by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) to compel desegregation between the city of Hartford and its suburban districts. A similar city suburbs desegregation strategy failed in the federal courts, but the Hartford lawsuit seeks to build on the success of school equal-finance cases under state constitutions. In 1991 the school board of La Crosse, Wisconsin, adopted a busing plan to equalize economic (rather than race) differences among schools. Reminiscent of the busing controversies of the 1970s, all board members who supported the busing plan were voted out of office in a regular and a recall election, reflecting the widespread community opposition to busing for the purpose of achieving socioeconomic balance in schools.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document