Search
Filter Search
State v. Rippey
Held that the preservation provision of the Plea Withdrawal Statute, requiring a request to withdraw a guilty plea to be made by motion before a sentence was announced, was a “procedural rule” that infringed the judiciary's power under separation of powers
In re Port City Air Leasing, Inc.
Held that the petitioner did not have their state constitutional right to a remedy or their procedural due process rights violated by their lack of standing to appeal the Department of Environmental Services' decision to grant a wetlands permit to their competitor
How the Tort Wars Became the Court Wars
Recent rulings in Ohio and North Carolina demonstrate divisions on medical malpractice damages caps.
People v. Clark
Held that arrests pursuant to investigative alerts do not automatically violate Illinois Constitution's search and seizure clause
Cottonwood Environmental Law Center v. State
Ruled that the statute limiting the right of local citizen initiatives to regulate auxiliary containers did not facially violate the state constitutional provision governing initiative and referendum
In re Chastain
Held that under art. IV of the North Carolina Constitution, a superior court judge commissioned to replace a recused resident superior court judge had the authority to remove a clerk from her elected office and that removal of a clerk of court may be based on misconduct, even if that conduct would not rise to the level of willful misconduct
Case Trends: State Courts Continue to Grapple with Covid-19 Policies
Courts are still weighing the constitutionality of state responses to the pandemic more than five years after its start.
National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Farrar
Held that the Mississippi Constitution, like the federal Constitution, requires state action for due-process violations, and that the university's cooperation with an NCAA investigation did not transform the NCAA into a state actor for the purposes of due process
Sumrall v. State
Ruled that the provision requiring prosecuting attorney's consent to retroactive first-offender treatment did not violate the Georgia Constitution provision providing that no person shall be deprived of right to prosecute or defend their cause in any of the courts of the state