Search for: "In Re: C.P."
Results 41 - 60
of 170
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Jul 2017, 7:24 pm
C.P. [read post]
31 May 2017, 7:30 am
In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967) (“[d]ue process of law is the primary and indispensable foundation of individual freedom. [read post]
8 May 2017, 6:38 am
In re Copps Chapel Methodist Episcopal Church, 120 Ohio St. 309, 310 (1929). [read post]
7 Jan 2017, 8:26 am
”) In re C.P., 2012-Ohio-1446 (Juveniles are entitled to “fundamental fairness,” and automatic, lifelong registration as a sex offender for juveniles violated this principle of due process.) [read post]
8 Nov 2016, 5:00 am
., 302-CV-2015 (C.P. [read post]
24 Oct 2016, 9:01 pm
By way of example, the court suggested the biological mother could attempt to show that the claims about her partner’s consent to the inseminations and her involvement in the pregnancies and births are untrue.Meanwhile, two time zones away, the Colorado Court of Appeals applied a similar statute, in In re C.P., to grant standing for a mother’s former same-sex partner to sue for parenting responsibilities even though the adult relationship ended prior to the… [read post]
30 Aug 2016, 8:23 am
In re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967) (“[N]either the Fourteenth Amendment nor the Bill of Rights is for adults alone. [read post]
11 Apr 2016, 6:30 am
In re C.P. discusses the general culpability of a child, but does not specifically address the procedural aspects to the case. [read post]
19 Feb 2016, 11:57 am
Corporation with no in-state assets, employees, or registered agent, cannot be at home.In re Roman Catholic Diocese of Albany, New York, Inc., 745 F.3d 30 (2d Cir. [read post]
5 Feb 2016, 7:55 am
Batty at *10, citing In Re Zoloft, 26 F. [read post]
2 Dec 2015, 12:38 pm
C.P. [read post]
30 Nov 2015, 1:25 pm
Rptr. 383, 384 (C.P. [read post]
25 Nov 2015, 7:11 am
In re C.P., 2012-Ohio-1446 (“The protections and rehabilitative aims of the juvenile process must remain paramount; we must recognize that juvenile offenders are less culpable and more amenable to reform than adult offenders. [read post]
16 Nov 2015, 7:25 am
Blankenship argued that the court should extend its holding in In Re C.P. to young adults such as himself, and emphasized the consensual nature of the relationship with M.H., the psychologist’s testimony that he is not likely to re-offend and was not, in his opinion, a sex offender, and the fact that the judge let him out of jail after serving only twelve days of his sentence. [read post]
9 Nov 2015, 7:09 am
Back in 2009 – when the blog was still a Bexis/Herrmann operation – we wrote a catch-all punitive damages post entitled (oddly enough) “On Punitive Damages. [read post]
27 Oct 2015, 1:33 pm
I recently re-read one of my favorite childhood books, Karen by Marie Killilea. [read post]
25 Apr 2015, 11:03 am
The first edition of the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence [Manual] was published in 1994, a year after the Supreme Court delivered its opinion in Daubert. [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 8:24 am
Nor is Blankenship entitled to the protections of In Re C.P., because he is not a juvenile. [read post]
4 Mar 2015, 6:49 am
Although Blankenship argues he has a relatively low risk of recidivism, he does not fit into class protected by In re C.P. and the application of In re C.P. here would create a slippery slope. [read post]
8 Jan 2015, 9:44 am
C.P. [read post]
