890 resultados para Massachusetts. Supreme Judicial Court.
Resumo:
Pursuant to Iowa Code section 2B.5, the State Roster is published as a correct list of state officers and deputies, members of boards and commissions, justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the Court of Appeals, judges of the district courts, including district associate judges and judicial magistrates, and members of the General Assembly. More specifically, the State Roster lists the membership of active, policy-making boards and commissions established by state law, executive order of the Governor, or Iowa Court Rule. The State Roster may also list advisory councils of a permanent nature whose members are appointed by the Governor, as well as other boards and commissions of interest to the public.
Resumo:
Pursuant to Iowa Code section 2B.5, the State Roster is published as a correct list of state officers and deputies, members of boards and commissions, justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the Court of Appeals, judges of the district courts, including district associate judges and judicial magistrates, and members of the General Assembly. More specifically, the State Roster lists the membership of active, policy-making boards and commissions established by state law, executive order of the Governor, or Iowa Court Rule. The State Roster may also list advisory councils of a permanent nature whose members are appointed by the Governor, as well as other boards and commissions of interest to the public.
Resumo:
Pursuant to Iowa Code section 2B.5, the State Roster is published as a correct list of state officers and deputies, members of boards and commissions, justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the Court of Appeals, judges of the district courts, including district associate judges and judicial magistrates, and members of the General Assembly. More specifically, the State Roster lists the membership of active, policy-making boards and commissions established by state law, executive order of the Governor, or Iowa Court Rule. The State Roster may also list advisory councils of a permanent nature whose members are appointed by the Governor, as well as other boards and commissions of interest to the public.
Resumo:
Pursuant to Iowa Code section 2B.5, the State Roster is published as a correct list of state officers and deputies, members of boards and commissions, justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the Court of Appeals, judges of the district courts, including district associate judges and judicial magistrates, and members of the General Assembly. More specifically, the State Roster lists the membership of active, policy-making boards and commissions established by state law, executive order of the Governor, or Iowa Court Rule. The State Roster may also list advisory councils of a permanent nature whose members are appointed by the Governor, as well as other boards and commissions of interest to the public.
Resumo:
Pursuant to Iowa Code section 2B.5, the State Roster is published as a correct list of state officers and deputies, members of boards and commissions, justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the Court of Appeals, judges of the district courts, including district associate judges and judicial magistrates, and members of the General Assembly. More specifically, the State Roster lists the membership of active, policy-making boards and commissions established by state law, executive order of the Governor, or Iowa Court Rule. The State Roster may also list advisory councils of a permanent nature whose members are appointed by the Governor, as well as other boards and commissions of interest to the public.
Resumo:
Pursuant to Iowa Code section 2B.5, the State Roster is published as a correct list of state officers and deputies, members of boards and commissions, justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the Court of Appeals, judges of the district courts, including district associate judges and judicial magistrates, and members of the General Assembly. More specifically, the State Roster lists the membership of active, policy-making boards and commissions established by state law, executive order of the Governor, or Iowa Court Rule. The State Roster may also list advisory councils of a permanent nature whose members are appointed by the Governor, as well as other boards and commissions of interest to the public.
Resumo:
Pursuant to Iowa Code section 2B.5, the State Roster is published as a correct list of state officers and deputies, members of boards and commissions, justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the Court of Appeals, judges of the district courts, including district associate judges and judicial magistrates, and members of the General Assembly. More specifically, the State Roster lists the membership of active, policy-making boards and commissions established by state law, executive order of the Governor, or Iowa Court Rule. The State Roster may also list advisory councils of a permanent nature whose members are appointed by the Governor, as well as other boards and commissions of interest to the public.
Resumo:
Pursuant to Iowa Code section 2B.5, the State Roster is published as a correct list of state officers and deputies, members of boards and commissions, justices of the Supreme Court, judges of the Court of Appeals, judges of the district courts, including district associate judges and judicial magistrates, and members of the General Assembly. More specifically, the State Roster lists the membership of active, policy-making boards and commissions established by state law, executive order of the Governor, or Iowa Court Rule. The State Roster may also list advisory councils of a permanent nature whose members are appointed by the Governor, as well as other boards and commissions of interest to the public.
Resumo:
This document lists the number of cases in both juvenile court and domestic relations court in South Carolina for the various counties and circuits.
Resumo:
This document is a summary of the number and percentage of pending family court cases divided by county and circuit.
Resumo:
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. Seven out of the 16 circuits met the standard.
Resumo:
This document is a summary of the number and percentage of pending family court cases divided by county and circuit.
Resumo:
This document is a summary of the number and percentage of pending family court cases divided by county and circuit.
Resumo:
Le 6 février 2015, la Cour suprême du Canada a rendu un jugement historique, unanime et anonyme. Dans l’arrêt Carter c. Canada (Procureur général), la Cour reconnaît que l’interdiction mur à mur de l’aide médicale à mourir porte atteinte aux droits constitutionnels de certaines personnes. En effet, les adultes capables devraient pouvoir demander l’aide d’un médecin pour mettre fin à leur vie s’ils respectent deux critères : consentir clairement et de façon éclairée à quitter ce monde et être affecté de problèmes de santé graves et irrémédiables leur causant des souffrances persistantes et intolérables. Or, cette décision constitue un renversement juridique, car un jugement inverse avait été rendu en 1993. En effet, vingt-deux ans auparavant, la Cour suprême avait jugé à cinq contre quatre que l’interdiction du suicide assisté était constitutionnelle. Dans l’arrêt Rodriguez c. Colombie-Britannique, la majorité avait statué que la protection du caractère sacré de la vie dans toute circonstance, tant pour les personnes vulnérables que pour les adultes capables, était une raison suffisante pour ne pas accorder de dérogation aux articles du Code criminel qui concernent le suicide assisté. Les juges majoritaires craignent alors que toute ouverture à l’aide au suicide entraine un élargissement progressif des critères d’admissibilité, ce que plusieurs appellent l’argument du « doigt dans l’engrenage ». Dans le cadre de ce mémoire, le renversement juridique Rodriguez-Carter sera analysé à la lumière du débat entre H. L. A. Hart et Ronald Dworkin. Alors que le premier défend une nouvelle version du positivisme modéré, le second offre une théorie nouvelle et innovatrice, nommée l’interprétativisme. L’objectif est simple : déterminer laquelle de ces deux théories explique le mieux le renversement juridique canadien concernant l’aide médicale à mourir. L’hypothèse initiale soutient que les deux théories pourront expliquer ledit renversement, mais que l’une le fera mieux que l’autre.