Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Taxation (2)
- Accounting (1)
- Administrative Law (1)
- Admiralty (1)
- Agency (1)
-
- Agriculture Law (1)
- Air and Space Law (1)
- Animal Law (1)
- Arts and Entertainment (1)
- Banking and Finance (1)
- Bankruptcy Law (1)
- Biography (1)
- Blood--Examination (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (1)
- Commercial Law (1)
- Communications Law (1)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (1)
- Computer Law (1)
- Conflict of Laws (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Consumer Protection Law (1)
- Contracts (1)
- Corporations (1)
- Courts (1)
- Criminal Law and Procedure (1)
- Dispute Resolution (1)
- Domestic Relations (1)
- Drivers' licenses--Suspension (1)
- Drunk driving--Minnesota (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Transportation Law
Breaking The Bank: Revisiting Central Bank Of Denver After Enron And Sarbanes-Oxley, Celia Taylor
Breaking The Bank: Revisiting Central Bank Of Denver After Enron And Sarbanes-Oxley, Celia Taylor
ExpressO
No abstract provided.
Revoke First, Ask Questions Later: Challenging Minnesota’S Unconstitutional Pre-Hearing Revocation Scheme, Jeffrey S. Sheridan, Erika Burkhart Booth
Revoke First, Ask Questions Later: Challenging Minnesota’S Unconstitutional Pre-Hearing Revocation Scheme, Jeffrey S. Sheridan, Erika Burkhart Booth
William Mitchell Law Review
This analysis of the constitutionality of Minnesota’s prehearing revocation scheme begins by explaining the mechanics of Minnesota’s implied consent statute. Because the United States Supreme Court has established minimum procedural due process protections that must be afforded drivers, this backdrop is examined. After considering the federal standards for procedural due process, the numerous changes to Minnesota’s implied consent statute will be addressed. Next, the current challenge will be discussed, including the factual basis for the challenge, the arguments for the statute’s unconstitutionality, and the district court’s decision. Finally, this note will conclude that, given the dramatic increase in the private …
Revisiting Granite Falls:Why The Seattle Monorail Project Requires Re-Examination Of Washington's Prohibition On Taxation Without Representation, Matthew Senechal
Revisiting Granite Falls:Why The Seattle Monorail Project Requires Re-Examination Of Washington's Prohibition On Taxation Without Representation, Matthew Senechal
Seattle University Law Review
The composition and actions of the un-elected Seattle Monorail Project (SMP) Board raise the question of whether the Washington State Constitution permits the legislature to delegate its taxing power to municipal corporations governed by unelected boards. Stated differently, the SMP Board and its actions present the question of whether the Washington State Constitution requires that local taxes be imposed only by officials who are elected by, and accountable to, the electorate burdened by the tax. While Washington's Constitution, political structures, and legal doctrine are designed to prevent "taxation without representation," the recent case of Granite Falls Library Facility Area v. …