The Supreme Court's Panel Structure

One of the important features of the Indian Supreme Court is its panel structure. At present it has 27 judges that on a characteristic day may sit in benches of two or three judges in one of over a dozen active courtrooms. In this sense, it's not a single court, but various courts. In this article that is to be published later this year in the American Journal of Comparative Law I look at how the Court's structure was promoted to further positive values or understandings of what a supreme court should be.

I argue that the desire for access to the Indian Supreme Court has come at the cost of a few of the cohesiveness of the Court's doctrine. But it has moreover had less intuitive consequences as well. It has encouraged judicial entrepreneurs who can use lesser benches to push precedent farther or more creatively than they may be able to if they sat on a larger bench.

It has empowered a Chief Justice dominant Court, where the Chief Justice's power to set benches and move cases has completed him the clear focal point and leader of an otherwise relatively fragmented institution and it has arguably helped decrease perceptions of politicization of the institution by the public because it is so hard for outsiders (or insiders) to see the creation of clearly defined coalitions of judges as happens on combined benches like the US Supreme Court where conservative and liberal wings of the court are well documented and debated.

Sex Crimes

The State of Texas callously penalizes sex offenses. Some sex crimes hold an obligatory verdict of life incarceration without the option of parole. Furthermore, sex offender listing may be required.

A conviction, if not the accusation, of a sex offense can obliterate your reputation, job, and your associations.

Sex crimes or sexually related criminal offenses under Texas law cover scores of different situations, with different punishments.

Sex crimes relating minors, for example, take account of as a penalty the record of the criminal person on a public list the recorded sex offenders list. Provoked sexual assaults and rapes can upshot in misdemeanor charges and long prison sentences. As far as Texas is concerned, sex crimes include criminal charges for:

• Sexual assault
• Rape
• Date rape
• Aggravated sexual assault
• Child molestation
• Statutory rape
• Spousal rape
• Indecency with a child
• Internet sex charges
• Indecent exposure
• Public lewdness
• Obscenity
• Indecency
• Possession of pornography
• Possession of child pornography
• Promotion of child pornography
• Solicitation of a child
• Online solicitation of a child (under age 17)
• Improper photography or visual recording
• Prostitution
• Promotion of prostitution
• Compelling prostitution
• Obscene display or distribution

Coming to the punishments for sex crimes in Texas, it can be life-altering. The stigma associated with the accusations could eventually devastate your job opportunities and reputation in the community and nothing is more horrifying than being charged with a sex offense.

The important matter isn’t whether there is a problem; it’s how to address it. In other words, when is parental or therapeutic intrusion enough? What kind of therapy works best here? And at what point should the legal system get involved and in what ways?

During this time it is imperative to hire the best criminal lawyer in Houston Texas to get you out of the charge indicted.

For More Details Visit: http://houstoncriminalattorney.com/

Supreme Court passes decision on legislative vote

The Congolese Supreme Court issued a verdict on a few of the legislative election disputes yesterday. I have posted a roll of the decisions here. In general, the court went against a few weighty interests, including by invalidating the two brothers of election commissioner Ngoy Mulunda (other members of the presidential majority took their places), as well as heavyweights similar to Jean-Jacques Mutuale (MLC), Anzuluni Bembe (opposition, former Mobutu strongman), Colette Tshomba (former deputy minister), Jean-Claude Baende (majority, governor of Equateur) and Jerome Kamate (opposition, former deputy minister).

The list comprises 32 invalidations of elected MPs; most of the disputes were between members of the ruling coalition. If I am counting correctly, three opposition MPs lost their seats to the ruling coalition, though the opposite does not seem to have occurred.

At the same time, the Supreme Court called for the left over results from the rest of the country to be at large reversing the election commission's cancellation of the legislative vote everywhere except for Masisi, where a original vote will need to be held.

Indiana Sued by Secular Group over State Marriage Law

Every headline in the nation has announced President Obama’s declaration of carry for legalized same-sex marriage. Meanwhile, a lawsuit in Indiana is challenging an additional aspect of matrimony.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana has filed suit on behalf of the Center for Inquiry, a secular group, saying it is a legal violation for marriages performed by non-religious groups not be recognized by state law, according to a declaration from the ACLU of Indiana.

“From a First Amendment perspective, it is proper and essential for the state to allow religions to marry people according to their attitude said ACLU Indiana Legal Director Ken Falk in the statement. “However, the state law becomes unconstitutional under the Establishment Clause while you say that religions are the only groups with rights to have their beliefs standard in marriage ceremonies.

Individual State Tax Liabilty for Corporate Officers

The reason that most corporations are formed is to provide limited liability to its shareholders, and to shield officers and directors of small businesses from various liabilities of those companies. However, there are a few distinct areas where shareholders may have liability for the actions of the company.

One of the most general "veil piercing" comes up in situations where a company collects sales taxes as part of its operations. Various officers and directors of companies do not realize that they can be held individually liable for taxes collected and not paid to the state. An example of this, and a excellent discussion related thereto, can be establish in the case State of Texas v. Crawford, a recent case out of the 3rd Court of Appeals in Texas.

Get Out Your Rulers: Lawyers Spar Over Line Spacing

Lawyers, as good advocates, try to cram as several arguments as possible in their legal briefs, mainly when judges impose limits on how much they can say.However, one side in a trademark argument in Manhattan federal court involving The Gap Inc. says their adversary went a small too far.

In a back-and-forth series of letters last month, lawyers beginning Patterson Belknap Webb Tyler LLP accused lawyers from Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu PC which is representing the Gap of varying the line spacing on their reply brief to a motion for summary judgment to give them “about four additional lines per page.”

The letters were part of a request by the plaintiff to file five additional pages in their memorandum of law in a trademark dispute involving T-shirts labeled with the expression “Lower East Side” and “LES NYC.”The judge in the case, Paul A. Engelmayer, requires documents filed in cases earlier than him to be double spaced.

Supreme Court Loses Favor with the Public

Public assessments of the Supreme Court include reached a quarter-century low. Unlike evaluations over much of the earlier period decade, there is very little partisan divide. The court receives relatively low positive ratings from Republicans, Democrats and independents alike.

The survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted April 4-15, 2012 among 1,514 adults nationwide, finds 52% offering a positive opinion of the Supreme Court, down from 58% in 2010 and the earlier low of 57%, in 2005 and 2007. About three-in-ten (29%) say they have an unfavorable view, which approaches the elevated reached in 2005 (30%).

According to the poll, 56% of Republicans, and 52% of both Democrats and independents rate the Supreme Court positively. That compares with April 2009, when 70% of Republicans, 63% of Democrats and 64% of independents held a positive opinion of the court.