scholarly journals Pennoyer Strikes Back

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-29
Author(s):  
William V. Dorsaneo
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Metal Industry ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
History Of ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions ◽  
The Law ◽  
Personal Jurisdiction

The primary purpose of this Article is to evaluate the four most recent Supreme Court decisions on personal jurisdiction and situate those decisions within the history of Supreme Court personal jurisdiction jurisprudence. Starting with the seminal case of Pennoyer v. Neff, personal jurisdiction jurisprudence has been remarkably kaleidoscopic, with the Supreme Court intervening at various intervals to redefine the law in broad strokes, while zigzagging from one doctrinal position to another and thereby leaving lower courts to hash out the application of an evolving personal jurisdiction doctrine to varying fact patterns. I will divide this jurisprudential history into two main groups of cases after Pennoyer was superseded by the modern minimum contacts approach. The first group of decisions begins with International Shoe Co. v. Washington and continues through Hanson v. Denckla. The second group begins almost two decades later with Shaffer v. Heitner and continues through Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court and Burnham v. Superior Court.

scholarly journals A Choice among Values: Theoretical and Historical Perspectives on the Defence of Necessity

1969 ◽  
pp. 848 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin L. Berger
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
Historical Perspectives ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
A Value ◽  
Canadian Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Way

The author explores various theoretical approaches to the defence of necessity, rejecting both excusatory conceptions of the defence and those based on the notion of moral involuntariness. Rather, the author argues that necessity is properly understood as a justificatory defence based on a lack of moral blameworthiness. After extensively surveying the history of the defence in Canadian law, the author critiques the way in which the Supreme Court of Canada has restricted the defence. He contrasts the current Canadian approach with the treatment of the defence in other jurisdictions and concludes that Canadian law would be served best by a robust defence of necessity, which would acknowledge that, in some circumstances, pursuit of a value of greater worth than the value of adherence to the law can be justified.

Summary Procedures in Israel and Abroad

1967 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernst Livneh
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
European Institutions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
History Of ◽  
New Israel ◽  
Rules Of The Game ◽  
Summary Procedure

The new Israel Civil Procedure Rules, 1963 re-enact in rr. 269–82, with certain amendments, rr. 241–50 of the Palestinian Civil Procedure Rules, 1938 dealing with “Summary Procedure on Specially Endorsed Statement of Claim”, which in their turn were a colonial version of Order XIV of the English Rules of the Supreme Court. A glance at some recent judgments in Israel shows a surprising number of cases in which doubts have arisen as to the application and scope of the Summary Procedure in general and the defendant's right to be heard in particular. One may wonder whether litigants and lower courts quite understand the rules of the game or whether the game is after all not as easy as might be expected of a summary procedure. And indeed, compared with institutions in continental Europe, where scores of thousands of claims are disposed of without discussion and complaint, our Summary Procedure seems inelegant and burdensome on plaintiff and defendant alike. It is the object of this study to compare it, and the procedure under the English Order XIV, with those European institutions. In view of the gap between Anglo-Israel and Continental notions of civil procedure it may be useful also to sketch the history of the various forms of action, viz. the (summary) trial by documents, the non-litigious executory instruments and the conditional command to pay.

scholarly journals Private Prosecutions in Mauritius: Clarifying Locus Standi and Making the Director of Public Prosecutions more Accountable

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Statutory Requirement ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

Case law shows that private prosecutions have been part of Mauritian law at least since 1873. In Mauritius there are two types of private prosecutions: private prosecutions by individuals; and private prosecutions by statutory bodies. Neither the Mauritian constitution nor legislation provides for the right to institute a private prosecution. Because of the fact that Mauritian legislation is not detailed on the issue of locus standi to institute private prosecutions and does not address the issue of whether or not the Director of Public Prosecutions has to give reasons when he takes over and discontinues a private prosecution, the Supreme Court has had to address these issues. The Mauritian Supreme Court has held, inter alia, that a private prosecution may only be instituted by an aggrieved party (even in lower courts where this is not a statutory requirement) and that the Director of Public Prosecutions may take over and discontinue a private prosecution without giving reasons for his decision. However, the Supreme Court does not define “an aggrieved party.” In this article the author takes issue with the Court’s findings in these cases and, relying on legislation from other African countries, recommends how the law could be amended to strengthen the private prosecutor’s position.

Prison Overcrowding and the Law

1985 ◽  
Vol 478 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
CLAUDIA ANGELOS ◽  
JAMES B. JACOBS
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Extended Period ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
The Other ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Prison Overcrowding ◽  
History Of ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
The 1960S

This article traces and analyzes the history of prison- and jail-crowding litigation in the federal courts since the 1960s. While prisoners and pretrial detainees have won many victories, the doctrinal basis for a constitutional right to uncrowded incarceration facilities remains unclear and is still evolving. Despite several recent Supreme Court decisions unfavorable to inmates, there has been no rejection of the principles (1) that the totality of conditions in prison—including crowding—must not amount to cruel and unusual punishment and (2) that jail crowding cannot be permitted to impose genuine privations over an extended period of time. In order to enforce the decrees outlawing overcrowding, judges have had to search for creative enforcement techniques. Many of these techniques are controversial and their effectiveness is disputed. The courts have forced the other branches of government to face up to crowded prisons and jails, and they have helped to ameliorate the suffering and deprivations that the overcrowding crisis has caused.

scholarly journals Le droit de recours de l'entrepreneur contre l'ingénieur ou l'architecte à la lumière d'arrêts récents de la Cour suprême

2005 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 625-638
Author(s):  
Thérèse Rousseau-Houle
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions ◽  
The Relationship

This paper surveys recent Supreme Court decisions dealing with the relationship between building contractors and architects or engineers participating in the same project. Normally, the agreement between the owner and the architect or the owner and the engineer vests no rights in the building contractor. The latter may only sue the architect or the engineer on an extra-contractual basis. Proceedings may then take the form of a recursory action, where the contractor, having been held jointly and severally liable towards the owner, attempts to have the architect or engineer take their share of liability. Alternatively, proceedings could be taken on the basis of a delict, in cases where negligence is alleged by the contractor against the architect or engineer. The Supreme Court seems inclined to view the problem from a contract perspective, and to restrict opportunities to sue on the basis of a delict.

scholarly journals Connecting Supreme Court Decisions, Media Coverage, and Public Opinion: The Case of Lawrence v. Texas

2006 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 209-230
Author(s):  
Mahalley D. Allen ◽  
Donald P. Haider-Markel
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Gay And Lesbian ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Media ◽  
Supreme Court Decisions ◽  
The Relationship

Many scholars have examined the relationship between public opinion and the U.S. Supreme Court, but most researchers have often failed to take into account the fact that the press mediates this relationship. Due to the public’s lack of independent knowledge about Supreme Court decisions, the media has the potential to play an influential role in the communication and interpretation of Supreme Court decisions. In this article, we examine the relationship between the Supreme Court, the media, and public opinion. First, we examine whether increased public tolerance on gay and lesbian issues has resulted in increased media coverage of gay-related cases before the Supreme Court. Second, we examine how media coverage of the Court’s 2003 decision to strike down state sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas may have been associated with decreased public support for gay and lesbian civil rights. Our analysis suggests that increased support for gay and lesbian civil rights may have lead to increased media attention to the Lawrence case and that the tone of this coverage may have subsequently resulted in an observed decrease in support for gay and lesbian civil rights following the Court’s decision. We also suggest that the release of a highly critical dissenting opinion by the Court in the case may have encouraged negative media coverage and the resulting shift in public opinion. Our research has broad implications for media coverage of Supreme Court decisions.

scholarly journals Implikasi Putusan Hakim Dalam Penetapan Sanksi Di Bawah Minimum Terhadap Tindak Pidana Narkotika

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-146
Author(s):  
Endy Ronaldi ◽  
Dahlan Ali ◽  
Mujibussalim Mujibussalim
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The One ◽  
Principle Of Legality

Tindak pidana narkotika merupakan kejahatan luar biasa sehingga menjadi prioritas pemerintah untuk diperangi. Penanggulangan tindak pidana narkotika diatur dalam Undang-Undang No. 35 Tahun 2009 tentang Narkotika. Salah satu pengaturan dalam undang-undang tersebut adalah pemberian sanksi di bawah minimum melalui putusan hakim. Sebagaimana kasus yang terjadi dalam Putusan Nomor 64/PID/2012/PN Sigli, Putusan No. 1/pid.sus/2016/PN Cag. (narkotika) dan Putusan No. 14/pid.sus/2016/PN Cag. Adapun permasalahan yang dikaji yaitu faktor penyebab hakim memutuskan sanksi di bawah minimum kepada pelaku narkotika dan implikasinya. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode yuridis normatif dengan mengkaji aspek normatif atas permasalahan yang dikaji. Pendekatan yang dilakukan adalah pendekatan kasuistik dengan menelaah putusan pengadilan. Putusan pengadilan dengan penetapan sanksi di bawah minimum disatu sisi bertentangan dengan asas legalitas dalam hukum pidana. Sehingga hal ini diakomodir dalam Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung No. 3 tahun 2015. Narcotics crimes are extraordinary crimes so that become government priorities to be minimized. Tackling narcotics crime is regulated in Law No. 35 of 2009 concerning Narcotics. One of the regulations in the law is to impose sanctions below the minimum through a judge's decision. As the case with is the Decision Number 64/PID/2012/PN Sigli. The problems studied are the factors that cause the judge to decide the minimum sanctions for narcotics and their implications. The research method used is a normative juridical method by examining the normative aspects of the problem under study. The approach taken is a casuistic approach by examining court decisions. Court decisions with the determination of sanctions below the minimum on the one hand are contrary to the principle of legality in criminal law. So that accommodated in the Supreme Court Circular No. 3 of 2015.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document