Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Year: 1977 Page 11 of about 475 results (0.020 seconds)

Jun 16 1977 (FN)

Jeffers Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-16-1977

jeffers v. united states - 432 u.s. 137 (1977) u.s. supreme court jeffers v. united states, 432 u.s. 137 (1977) jeffers v. united states no. 75-1805 argued march 21, 1977 decided june 16, 1977 432 u.s. 137 certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the seventh circuit syllabus a federal grand jury returned two indictments against petitioner for offenses under 21 u.s.c. one charged him and nine others with violating 846 by conspiring to distribute heroin and cocaine during a specified period in violation of 841(a)(1), the indictment specifying, inter alia, that the conspiracy was to be accomplished by petitioner's assumption of leadership of a certain organization, by distribution of controlled substances, and by acquisition of substantial sums of money through such distribution. the other charged petitioner alone with violating 848, which prohibits conducting a continuing criminal enterprise to violate the drug laws, by his distributing and possessing with intent to distribute heroin and cocaine, in violation of 841(a)(1) during the same specified period, the indictment alleging that he had undertaken the distribution "in concert" with five or more others, with respect to whom he occupied the position of organizer and supervisor, and that, as a result of the distribution, he had obtained a substantial income. the court denied a motion by the government to consolidate the indictments for trial, which the petitioner and his codefendants had opposed on the grounds .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 1977 (FN)

SwaIn Vs. Pressley

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-22-1977

swain v. pressley - 430 u.s. 372 (1977) u.s. supreme court swain v. pressley, 430 u.s. 372 (1977) swain v. pressley no. 75-811 argued january 19, 1977 decided march 22, 1977 430 u.s. 372 certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit syllabus respondent, in custody pursuant to a sentence imposed by the superior court of the district of columbia, applied in the united states district court for the district of columbia for a writ of habeas corpus seeking a review of the constitutionality of the proceedings that led to his conviction and sentence. the district court dismissed the application on the basis of d.c.code ann. 23-110(g) (1973), which provides that an application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a prisoner authorized to apply for collateral relief by motion in the superior court pursuant to the statute "shall not be entertained by the superior court or by any federal or state court if it appears that the applicant has failed to make a motion for relief under this section or that the superior court has denied him relief. . . ." the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit reversed. doubting the constitutionality of the statutory curtailment of the district court's jurisdiction to issue writs of habeas corpus, the court construed the statute as merely requiring the exhaustion of local remedies before a habeas corpus petition could be filed in the district court, and concluded that respondent had .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 1977 (HC)

T.S. Radhakrishnan Vs. the State Bank of India, Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Oct-11-1977

Reported in : AIR1978Mad163

1. this appeal by the defendant in c. s. no. 68 of 1967 on the original side of this court is directed against the order of mohan j. in diary no. 11511 of 1974 dated 14-2-1975 directing the inclusion of rs. 100 and rs. 150 said to have been paid by the appellant on 11 -4-1967 and 26-4-1967 respectively, rs. 850 paid to the receiver for his remuneration and rs. 5017-30 paid to the receiver for his expenses as per order dated 11-4-1967 in appn. no. 849 of 1967 in the costs awarded to the respondent (plaintiff) in the decree in the said cs no. 68 of 1967.2. the judgment dated 7-7-1971 of n.s. ramaswami j. declares the respondent to be entitled to costs from the appellant. in accordance with order xviii rule 6 of the original side rules, clause 3 of the decree declares that the respondent is entitled to costs of suit when taxed and noted in the margin of the decree. one of the prayers in the suit was for appointment of a receiver to take charge of the properties described in schedule i to the plaint and protect the same and safeguard the interest of the respondent as the pledgee of those properties. an interim receiver had been appointed by order dated 10-4-1967 in appn. no. 840 of 1967, pending the suit. clause 8 of the decree provides for adjustment of the amount deposited into court by the receiver as the sale proceeds of the hypothecated goods towards the amount due to the respondent under the decree. the respondent filed an application on 21-7-1971, before the registrar to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 07 1977 (FN)

Rinaldi Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Nov-07-1977

rinaldi v. united states - 434 u.s. 22 (1977) u.s. supreme court rinaldi v. united states, 434 u.s. 22 (1977) rinaldi v. united states no. 76-6194 decided november 7, 1977 434 u.s. 22 on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit syllabus after petitioner was convicted of state offenses arising out of a robbery, he was tried and convicted of a federal offense arising out of the same robbery, in violation of the government's policy against multiple prosecutions for the same act (the so-called petite policy based on petite v. united states, 361 u. s. 529 ). government trial counsel had represented to the district court that the government had decided vigorously to prosecute the federal charges in spite of the prior state prosecution, when in fact the federal prosecution had not been authorized as required by the petite policy. thereafter, notwithstanding the government's subsequent acknowledgement that the petite policy had been violated, the district court denied the government's motion to dismiss the indictment pursuant to fed.rule crim.proc. 48(a) (which provides that the government may "by leave of court" file a dismissal of an indictment), on the ground, inter alia, that the prosecutor had acted in bad faith by representing to the court that he had been properly instructed to maintain the prosecution despite the prior state convictions. the court of appeals affirmed. held: the district court abused its discretion in denying .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 06 1977 (HC)

Gulabrai Kalidas Naik and ors. Vs. Laxmidas Lallubhai Patel of Baroda ...

Court : Gujarat

Decided on : May-06-1977

Reported in : [1978]48CompCas438(Guj); (1977)GLR42; (1978)0GLR192; (1977)47CompCas151

d.a. desai, j. 1. a question touching the jurisdiction of this court is raised at this state by way of preliminary objection in this petition. the petition is filed under section 155 of the companies act, 1956, prying for rectification of the register and for reliefs under sections 397 and 398. after the notices were issued to the company and other respondents calling upon them to show cause why the petition would not be admitted, respondents who were then on record appeared, and raised contentions that a composite petition for relief under section 155 and sections 397 and 398 of the companies act would not lie because the relief under sections 397 and 398 is only available to a member of a company whose membership is not in dispute and as the petitioner in this petition also seek a relief by way of rectification of register, their membership being in dispute in dispute, such a composite petition cannot be entertained by the court. 2. the contention was overruled as per decision a dated 26th june, 1975 [vide gulabrai kalidas naik v. laxmidas lallubhai patel [1977] 47 comp cas 151 (guj)] admitting the petition for relief under section 155 and keeping the prayer for relief under sections 397 and 398 a in a abeyance till relief under section 155 is determined. directors were given for filing affidavit-in-reply and date was fixed for admission documents. thereafter, the court, after taking into consideration rival contentions, framed the issues that arise for determination in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 23 1977 (FN)

Wainwright Vs. Sykes

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-23-1977

wainwright v. sykes - 433 u.s. 72 (1977) u.s. supreme court wainwright v. sykes, 433 u.s. 72 (1977) wainwright v. sykes no. 75-1578 argued march 29, 1977 decided june 23, 1977 433 u.s. 72 certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit syllabus during respondent's trial for murder, inculpatory statements made by him to police officers were admitted into evidence. no challenge was made on the ground that respondent had not understood warnings read to him pursuant to miranda v. arizona, 384 u. s. 436 , nor did the trial judge sua sponte question their admissibility or hold a factfinding hearing. respondent, who was convicted, did not challenge the admissibility of the statements on appeal, though later he did so, unavailingly, in a motion to vacate the conviction and in state habeas corpus petitions. he then brought this federal habeas corpus action under 28 u.s.c. 2254, asserting the inadmissibility of his statements by reason of his lack of understanding of the miranda warnings. the district court ruled that, under jackson v. denno, 378 u. s. 368 , respondent had a right to a hearing in the state court on the voluntariness of the statements, and that he had not lost that right by failing to assert his claim at trial or on appeal. the court of appeals agreed that respondent was entitled to a jackson v. denno hearing, and ruled that respondent's failure to comply with florida's procedural "contemporaneous objection rule" (which, except as specified, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 1977 (HC)

R. Srinivasan Vs. S.P. Krishnamoorthy Sarma and ors.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Feb-07-1977

Reported in : (1978)1MLJ452

v. ramaswami, j.1. the plaintiff is the appellant. the suit was filed for recovery of the suit properties from defendants 6 to 14. one subbaraya iyer purchased originally a small bit of land in raghunathapuram, which is a harrlet of sholapuram within the sub-registration district of tiruvidaimaruthur, kumbakonam taluk, and with his owr money put up a tiled building and planted cocoanut trees. in the building he installed 'sri ramachandramurthy' and consecrated the same and was performing daily pooja, and neivedyam end was also conducting festivals on important occasions. later on, by a deed of endowment dated 4th september, 1904 he corstituted this into a trust and endowed also other properties. he called the trust property as a public charitable trust. the hindu community of the village were worshipping in the madam, doing bajanal and holding festivals on important occasions. the trust deed provided also for the management of the trust properties and the madam. the founder constituted himself as the first trustee and further provided that after his death, the eldest of his brothers should become a trustee and thereafter the eldest sons of his brothers should succeed and manage the properties as sole trustees. in the event of a failure to assume the trusteeship by any persons referred to above, or on their acting adversely to the trust, the deed further provided that it would be open to anybody who is interested in the trust or any worshipper to take steps in a court of law .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 09 1977 (FN)

Abney Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jun-09-1977

abney v. united states - 431 u.s. 651 (1977) u.s. supreme court abney v. united states, 431 u.s. 651 (1977) abney v. united states no. 75-6521 argued january 17, 1977 decided june 9, 1977 431 u.s. 651 certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the third circuit syllabus petitioners and others were charged in a single-count indictment with conspiracy and an attempt to obstruct interstate commerce by means of extortion, in violation of the hobbs act. petitioners challenged the indictment as duplicitous, contending that its single count improperly charged both a conspiracy and an attempt to violate the hobbs act. the district court refused to dismiss the indictment but required the prosecution to prove all the elements of both offenses charged in the indictment, and instructed the jury to that effect. the jury returned a guilty verdict against each petitioner. the court of appeals reversed and ordered a new trial on certain evidentiary grounds, at the same time directing the government to elect between the conspiracy and attempt charges on remand. after the government elected to proceed on the conspiracy charge, petitioners moved to dismiss the indictment on grounds that the retrial would expose them to double jeopardy and that the indictment, as modified by the election, failed to charge an offense. the district court denied the motion, and petitioners immediately appealed. the court of appeals affirmed, but did not address the government's argument that the court .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 02 1977 (FN)

Blackledge Vs. Allison

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-02-1977

blackledge v. allison - 431 u.s. 63 (1977) u.s. supreme court blackledge v. allison, 431 u.s. 63 (1977) blackledge v. allison no. 75-1693 argued february 22, 1977 decided may 2, 1977 431 u.s. 63 certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fourth circuit syllabus at the arraignment of respondent, who had been indicted in north carolina for various state criminal offenses, he entered a guilty plea to a single count of attempted safe robbery. in response to two of various form questions that under then-applicable procedures were put by the trial judge to those entering guilty pleas, respondent acknowledged that he understood that he could be imprisoned for a minimum of 10 years to a maximum of life, and that no one had made promises or threats to influence him to plead guilty. without further questioning, the judge accepted the plea on an "adjudication" form, which, inter alia, recited that respondent had pleaded guilty to attempted safe robbery "freely, understandingly and voluntarily," with full awareness of the consequences, and "without undue . . . compulsion . . . duress, [or] promise of leniency." at a sentencing hearing three days later, respondent was sentenced to 17-21 years. after unsuccessfully exhausting a state collateral remedy, respondent sought a writ of habeas corpus in a federal district court, claiming that his guilty plea had been induced by the promise of his attorney, who presumably had consulted with the judge and solicitor, that he would get .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 31 1977 (FN)

Trainor Vs. Hernandez

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-31-1977

trainor v. hernandez - 431 u.s. 434 (1977) u.s. supreme court trainor v. hernandez, 431 u.s. 434 (1977) trainor v. hernandez no. 75-1407 argued january 18, 1977 decided may 31, 1977 431 u.s. 434 appeal from the united states district court for the northern district of illinois syllabus rather than charging appellees with the crime of fraudulently concealing assets while applying for and receiving public assistance, the illinois department of public aid (idpa) brought a civil action against appellees in state court seeking only a return of the welfare payments alleged to have been wrongfully received, and as part of the action a writ of attachment was issued and executed pursuant to the illinois attachment act against appellees' property without notice or hearing. instead of seeking a prompt hearing in the state court or moving there to quash the attachment on federal constitutional grounds, appellees filed suit against appellant idpa officials in federal district court, alleging that the attachment act was unconstitutional in that it provided for deprivation of debtors' property without due process of law, and seeking, inter alia, return of the attached property. declining to dismiss the complaint under the doctrine of younger v. harris, 401 u. s. 37 , and huffman v. pursue, ltd., 420 u. s. 592 , a three-judge court held the act unconstitutional and issued an injunction directing return of appellees' attached property. held: the district court should have dismissed appellees .....

Tag this Judgment!

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //