Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Anatomy of a Trial (1)
- Brady on Bank Checks (1)
- Civil Rights and Responsibilities Under the Constitution (1)
- Decisions of the US Supreme Court (1)
- Federal Practice and Procedure (1)
-
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1)
- Fourth amendment (1)
- Franchising (1)
- Interrogatories and Depositions in Virginia (1)
- Law And Poverty Cases and Materials (1)
- Public School Law Cases and Materials (1)
- Randolph (1)
- Reasonable expectation of privacy (1)
- Selective Service Law Reporter (1)
- Student Protest and The Law (1)
- Supreme Court (1)
- The Insanity Defense (1)
- The Law of Copyright Under the Universal Convention (1)
- The Road From Runnymeade (1)
- The Statutes at Large (1)
- The Wheels The State of Connecticut vs. Patrick G. Finno (1)
- Virginia Code (1)
- Warrant (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Overhauling Rules Of Evidence In Pro Se Courts, Andrew C. Budzinski
Overhauling Rules Of Evidence In Pro Se Courts, Andrew C. Budzinski
University of Richmond Law Review
State civil courtrooms are packed to the brim with litigants, but not with lawyers. Since the early 1990s, more and more litigants in state courts have appeared without legal counsel. Pro se litigation has grown consistently and enormously over the past few decades. State court dockets are dominated by cases brought by unrepresented litigants, most often in domestic violence, family law, landlord-tenant, and small claims courts.
Yet, the American courtroom is not designed for use by those unrepresented litigants—it is designed for use by attorneys. The American civil court is built upon a foundation of dense procedural rules, thick tomes …
Georgia V. Randolph: Whose Castle Is It, Anyway?, Lesley Mccall
Georgia V. Randolph: Whose Castle Is It, Anyway?, Lesley Mccall
University of Richmond Law Review
The Fourth Amendment protects individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures. Generally, a warrant is required to conduct a lawful search of a person's home, and a warrantless search is unreasonable per se. However, there are some exceptions to this requirement. A warrantless search is reasonable if police obtain voluntary consent from a person to search their home or effects. The Supreme Court has also recognized that a third party with common authority over a household may consent to a police search affecting an absent co-occupant. The Supreme Court of the United States recently addressed whether third party consent was effective …
Books Received
University of Richmond Law Review
These are the books received by the Law School in 1970.
Depositions For Discovery: The New Virginia Rule, J. Westwood Smithers
Depositions For Discovery: The New Virginia Rule, J. Westwood Smithers
University of Richmond Law Review
Important amendments to its Rules, effective April 1, 1961, were recently adopted by the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia. Perhaps the change of most interest to trial lawyers was the revision of Rule 3:23 relating to D'epositions and Discovery in Actions at Law.