South Carolina/common pleas court circuits meeting benchmark 80% of Pending Docket 365 Days or Less From Placement on the Trial Docket as of February 28, 2015

This is a list of the courts in all the circuits of South Carolina and the percentage of cases disposed of in 365 day or less. Only three courts met the 80% benchmark.

South Carolina/general sessions court circuits meeting benchmark : 80% of pending docket 365 days or less as of February 28, 2015

This document provides statistics on criminal and general sessions courts meeting the benchmark of 80% of pending dockets broken down by circuits and counties.

South Carolina/family court circuits meeting benchmark : 80% of pending docket 365 days or less as of February 28, 2015

This is a diagram broken down by circuits of the percentage of family courts meeting the benchmark of 80% of disposing of cases within a year.

Summary of Family Court activity by circuit/county for period 7/1/2014 Thru 2/28/2015

This document lists the number of cases in both juvenile court and domestic relations court in South Carolina for the various counties and circuits.

Summary of pending family court cases by circuit and class as of 2/28/2015

This document is a summary of the number and percentage of pending family court cases divided by county and circuit.

Memorial with the resolutions adopted at the anti-tariff meeting held at Abbeville Court-House, South Carolina, on Monday, the 3d of September, 1827

This document contains the resolutions adopted at the anti-tariff meeting held at the Abbeville courthouse following taxes imposed by the federal government, which members of the state believed to be unconstitutional.

Address delivered by Chief Justice Eugene B. Gary, L.L.D. at the dedication of the Court House, McCormick County, September 27th, 1923

This document is an address by Chief Justice Eugene B. Gary that discusses the civilization of America in two contexts. The first context is the principles of civilization applicable to their democratic form of government. The second context is the dangers that threaten to destroy the very foundation of their government.

Digital evidence as a means of proof before the International Court of Justice

This article discusses the use of digital evidence as a means of proof before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The absence of specific Court rules and procedures for digital evidence (with the exception of Practice Direction IX bis) is not necessarily an obstacle to its production and evaluation before the ICJ, as the general evidentiary rules can also be applied to digital evidence. The article first looks at the rules on the production of documentary evidence and then examines the specific issues related to audiovisual evidence. Finally, it examines the admissibility of digital evidence unlawfully obtained by a litigant through unilateral transborder access to data. The article concludes that, even if specific regulation may be needed as to the specific way in which authenticity and accuracy of digital evidence are to be established, the particular facts of the case and the grounds of challenge can vary widely, and it is doubtful that any regulation could be sufficiently flexible to deal with this in advance.

Limiting rights, Canadian style : the Supreme Court of Canada, American jurisprudence and section 1 of the Charter /

The addition of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms represented a fundamental shift in Canadian governance. Many saw the tabling of such a document as a further, even fmal, step towards the Americanization of the Canadian polity. While the Charter's presence has significantly altered the relationship between citizens, government and the courts, it has done so by maintaining the traditional values and experiences that has been the hallmarks of Canadian constitutionalism. This is in contrast to the fears harboured by critics suggesting that the Charter was a further Americanization of the Canadian Polity, notwithstanding the very different natures of the American Bill of Rights and the Canadian Charter. Analyzing American Supreme Court precedent use by the Canadian Supreme Court has demonstrated that such an Americanization has not, in fact, occurred. In the present analysis of American precedent use in section 1 limitation of rights cases, the citation of these precedents are at best episodic, at least on the quantitative level. Qualitatively, the Canadian Supreme Court generally uses American jurisprudence to further support broad definitions of 'great rights' . As for the more intricate details of rights limitations and the process involved in detennining how Charter rights are limited, one would be hard pressed to find even cursory references to American case law.

Captain Lewis Warrington and others : memorial of Lewis Warrington, Captain in the U.S. Navy, (in behalf of himself and the officers and crew of the U.S. sloop-of-war Peacock); praying that the one half of the proceeds of the Epervier and goods which went into the officers and crew of said vessel, it having been decreed to them by the United States court as captors. April 26, 1848.--

Caption title.

Proceedings of the Court Martial, held on the officers and crew of His Majesty's late ship, the Java. --

Ordered to be printed 10th May 1813.

Proceedings of a court of inquiry, convened on board the United States frigate the President, in the harbour of New York, on the thirteenth day of August, 1811, pursuant to the following warrant : To Stephen Decatur, esquire, a captain in the Navy of the United States. --

Caption title.