Group items tagged

udge Kaplan commented that at-will employees who have been discharged from working for the State government use mandamus, since there is no appeal authorized for an at-will employee who has been wrongfully discharged. Mr. Sykes pointed out this would come under regular mandamus, which is applicable when there is no record. When an agency makes a final decision affecting the rights of parties, an appeal is effected by administrative mandamus if there is no statutory right of appeal.

Mr. Gohn noted that he did not believe that under administrative or regular mandamus, there would be the necessity to file the entire file. Ms. Baron may have been looking at the certiorari rule, which does not apply.

Court Opinions US Supreme Court US Tax Court Board of Patent Appeals State Laws Alabama Arizona California Florida Georgia Illinois Indiana Massachusetts Michigan Nevada New Jersey New York North Carolina Oregon Pennsylvania Texas Virginia Washington US Code Copyrights Crimes Labor Patents Shipping US Constitution Preamble Art. I - Legislative Art. II - Executive Art. III - Judicial Art. IV - States' Relations Art. V - Mode of Amendment Art. VI - Prior Debts Art VII - Ratification California Evidence Code Section 669 Legal Research Home > California Lawyer > Evidence Code > California Evidence Code Section 669 Sponsored Links google_protectAndRun("ads_core.google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad); google_protectAndRun("ads_core.google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad); (a) The failure of a person to exercise due care is presumed if: (1) He violated a statute, ordinance, or regulation of a public entity; (2) The violation proximately caused death or injury to person or property; (3) The death or injury resulted from an occurrence of the nature which the statute, ordinance, or regulation was designed to prevent; and (4) The person suffering the death or the injury to his person or property was one of the class of persons for whose protection the statute, ordinance, or regulation was adopted. (b) This presumption may be rebutted by proof that: (1) The person violating the statute, ordinance, or regulation did what might reasonably be expected of a person of ordinary prudence, acting under similar circumstances, who desired to comply with the law; or (2) The person violating the statute, ordinance, or regulation was a child and exercised the degree of care ordinarily exercised by persons of his maturity, intelligence, and capacity under similar circumstances, but the presumption may not be rebutted by such proof if the violation occurred in the course of an activity normally engaged in only by adults and requiring adult qualifications. Section: Previous  660  662  663  664  665  666  667  668  669  669.1  669.5  670  Next Last modified: January 12, 2009 google_protectAndRun("ads_core.google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);border: medium none ; margin: 0pt; paddin

Rule 201. Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts (a) Scope of rule.—This rule governs only judicial notice of adju- dicative facts. (b) Kinds of facts.—A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2

capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned

The purpose of Section 1979 is to create a right of action, enforceable in federal courts, against those who, "under color of" state law, deprive any person of any rights, privileges and immunities guaranteed by the Constitution and laws. Monroe v. Pape, supra.2 We are convinced that the legal principles involved in this case are not distinguishable from Monroe v. Pape, supra, and Stringer v. Dilger, supra, and that it was error to direct a verdict for the police officer defendants. See Hardwick v. Hurley, 7 Cir., 289 F.2d 529. A jury question was presented as to whether the conduct of the police officers on the different occasions was so arbitrary, unreasonable and without probable cause as to subject the plaintiff to a deprivation of rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.

Grant amounts under this section may not be used to bring a cause of action for damages. (c) False Claims Act

hapter 11: Political Crime Frontline Online Video: The Enemy Within http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/enemywithin/view/ Frontline Online Video: Al Qaeda's New Front http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/front/view/ Habeas Schmabeas Podcast 3/10/06 Episode 310 (59:58) http://www.thislife.org The New Role of Neighborhood Watch http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=3844320 (41:32) These programs examine the key elements of terrorism and America's response to its threat. Questions: How do these programs about terrorism fit with the material presented in this chapter? Explain the changes in policy discussed in these programs. Do they seem to be effective? Note: Other Frontline shows of related interest that can be ordered include Frontline: Campaign Against Terror http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/campaign/ Frontline: Inside the Terror Network http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/network/ Frontline: Trail of a Terrorist http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/trail/