Justia – an extensive resource for federal and state statutory laws, as well as case law at both the federal and state levels.

Article 199 in the Constitution allows High Court intervention only when "no other enough remedy is provided by regulation." It is very well-settled that an aggrieved person must exhaust accessible remedies before invoking High Court jurisdiction, regardless of whether those remedies suit them. The doctrine of exhaustion of remedies prevents unnecessary High Court litigation. Read more

In that perception, case legislation differs from just one jurisdiction to another. For example, a case in Big apple would not be decided using case legislation from California. Alternatively, New York courts will evaluate the issue depending on binding precedent . If no previous decisions within the issue exist, New York courts may evaluate precedents from a different jurisdiction, that would be persuasive authority alternatively than binding authority. Other factors for example how aged the decision is plus the closeness to the facts will affect the authority of a specific case in common regulation.

Also, it may well review an appeal of a decision for which it's got granted certification. In addition to its legal authority, the Court holds limited political authority. It will review and finalize a decision by the New Jersey Redistricting Commission on redistricting congressional districts if the Commission cannot arrive at a decision.

This Court could interfere where the authority held the proceedings against the delinquent officer in a very fashion inconsistent with the rules of natural justice or in violation of statutory rules prescribing the mode of inquiry or where the conclusion or finding attained because of the disciplinary authority is based on no evidence. If the conclusion or finding is like no reasonable person would have ever reached, the Court could interfere with the conclusion or even the finding and mould the relief to really make it correct into the facts of every case. In service jurisprudence, the disciplinary authority is the sole judge of facts. Where the appeal is presented, the appellate authority has coextensive power to re-appreciate the evidence or maybe the nature of punishment. About the aforesaid proposition, we are fortified with the decision in the Supreme Court in the case of Ghulam Murtaza Shaikh v. Chief Minister Sindh (2024 SCMR 1757). Read more

When there isn't any prohibition against referring to case law from a state other than the state in which the case is being read, it holds small sway. Still, if there is not any precedent within the home state, relevant case regulation from another state can be regarded as from the court.

In 1996, the Nevada Division of Child and Family Services (“DCFS”) removed a twelve-year outdated boy from his home to protect him from the Awful physical and sexual abuse he had suffered in his home, also to prevent him from abusing other children while in the home. The boy was placed in an crisis foster home, and was later shifted all over within the foster care system.

11 . Const. P. 1479/2024 (S.B.) Mst. Shir Bano and another V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi Primarily, this is a free and democratic country, and once a person becomes a major they can marry whosoever he/she likes; When the parents with the boy or girl don't approve of these types of inter-caste or interreligious marriage the maximum they are able to do if they might Minimize off social relations with the son or the daughter, Nevertheless they cannot give threats or commit or instigate for acts of violence and cannot harass the person who undergoes such inter-caste or inter-religious marriage. I therefore, direct that the administration/police authorities will see, if any boy or Female who's major undergoes inter-caste or inter-religious marriage with a woman or male that's a major, the few is neither harassed by everyone nor subjected to threats or acts of violence and anyone who provides these types of threats or harasses or commits acts of violence both himself or at his instigation, is taken to endeavor by instituting criminal proceedings from the police against these persons and further stern action is taken against this kind of person(s) as provided by legislation.

On June sixteen, 1999, a lawsuit was filed on behalf with the boy by a guardian advertisement litem, against DCFS, the social worker, plus the therapist. A similar lawsuit was also filed on behalf on the Roe’s victimized son by a different guardian advert litem. The defendants petitioned the trial court to get a dismissal based on absolute immunity, since they were all performing in their Work with DCFS.

Summaries offer concise explanations of legal principles and significant cases pertaining to land ownership, real estate transactions, property rights, and related matters, assisting you in understanding the intricacies of land and property regulation.

Under Article 199, the court possesses the authority to review government insurance policies for reasonableness if applicable in respondent university and to safeguard aggrieved parties' rights. For that reason, this petition is admissible based on founded court precedents, as well as the respondents' objections are overruled. Read more

These lists are sorted chronologically by Chief Justice and consist of all notable cases decided from the court. Articles exist for almost all cases.

As being the Supreme Court would be the final arbitrator of all cases where the decision is achieved, therefore the decision of the Supreme Court needs to get read more taken care of as directed in terms of Article 187(two) on the Constitution. ten. We must dismiss these petitions because the Supreme Court has already ruled on this. Read more

Matter:-SERVICE Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Creator) Const. P. 642/2023 (D.B.) Fatima Noor V/S Dow University of Health Science and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi SHC Citation: SHC-225471 Tag:Coming for the main case, It is usually a effectively-founded proposition of law that when an inquiry is conducted on charges of misconduct by a public servant, the Court is concerned with determining whether the inquiry was held by a competent officer or whether rules of natural justice are complied with. Whether the findings or conclusions are based on some evidence, the authority entrusted with the power to hold inquiry has jurisdiction, power, and authority to succeed in a finding of fact or summary. But that finding must be based on some evidence. Neither the technical rules nor proof of a fact or evidence during the Stricto-Sensu, apply to disciplinary proceedings. When the authority accepts that evidence and conclusion get support therefrom, the disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that the delinquent officer is guilty of the charge, however, that is topic to your procedure provided under the relevant rules instead of otherwise, for your reason that the Court in its power of judicial review does not act as appellate authority to re-take pleasure in the evidence and to reach at its independent findings to the evidence.