Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1)
- Brown v. Brown (1)
- Chimel v. California (1)
- Common law (1)
- Conveyor's Corp. of America v. Industrial Commission (1)
-
- Coolidge v. New Hampshire (1)
- Employee (1)
- Hewlett v. George (1)
- Independent contractor (1)
- Industrial Relations Commission (1)
- Johnson v. Commonwealth (1)
- Kaufman v. United States (1)
- Ker v. California (1)
- Linkletter v. Walker (1)
- Louisville v. Chapman (1)
- Mapp v. Ohio (1)
- Schneckloth v. Bustamonte (1)
- Semayne's Case (1)
- Surratt v. Thompson (1)
- Tipper v. Great Lakes Chemical Co. (1)
- United States v. Calandra (1)
- United States v. White (1)
- Weeks v. United States (1)
- Whiteley v. Warden (1)
- Wolf v. Colorado (1)
- Workmen's compensation claims (1)
- Worrell v. Worrell (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Workmen's Compensation Benefits Recoverable On The Existence Of A Quasi Contract, David Frisch
Workmen's Compensation Benefits Recoverable On The Existence Of A Quasi Contract, David Frisch
Law Faculty Publications
An analysis on a worker's compensation case decided by the Supreme Court of Florida.
The Burger Court: Discord In Search And Seizure, Robert S. Irons
The Burger Court: Discord In Search And Seizure, Robert S. Irons
University of Richmond Law Review
The accession of Mr. Chief Justice Burger to the Supreme Court of the United States was expected to signal the limitation of constitutional doctrines by which the Court had enhanced the rights of the criminal defendant. The fulfillment of this expectation has been generally marked by decisions which have been readily and quickly comprehensible. For example, the prosecution was prohibited by the Warren Court from employing any products of the defendant's custodial interrogation in the absence of a warning of his right to counsel and his right to remain silent; the statement so procured is still barred in the case …
The Virginia Supreme Court: Authority Versus Power To Abolish The Common Law
The Virginia Supreme Court: Authority Versus Power To Abolish The Common Law
University of Richmond Law Review
The question of whether a state supreme court has the authority to abolish or modify a common law rule which is incorporated into the law of that state has been a frequent issue in courts throughout the United States. Every state, except Louisiana, has adopted the common law by statute or constitutional provision. Virginia has employed both methods.