2018: Vital Cases To Be Heard At Supreme Court

The United States National Bureau of Standards officially dedicates the Standards Western Automatic Computer (SWAC), one of the first digital computers in history, at the Bureau’s Institute for Numerical Analysis at the University of California, Los Angeles. The computer was designed and its construction was overseen by Harry Huskey, whom history will hail as a pioneer in the computer field. A British patent for “A Computer Arranged for the Automatic Solution of Linear Programming Problems,” applied for on May 21, 1962 is granted. It’s often cited as the first software patent in history, though a similar patent was granted in Belgium on November 21, 1963. The patent covers a technique for memory management for the simplex algorithm. Royal Philips Electronics manufactures the world’s first compact disk (CD) at the Polygram recording company’s factory in Langenhagen, Germany. The first CD to be produced is The Visitors album by the ABBA music group, which will be released in November 1982 along with about another one hundred fifty titles on CD, mostly classical music.

Version 4.06 of Netscape Communicator web browser is released. The Nielson/NetRatings market research firm reports that over fifty percent of United States homes or approximately 144 million people now have access to the Internet. The United States Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia refuses the Microsoft Corporation’s motion to delay the antitrust case brought against the company during an appeal to the Supreme Court. Federal law enforcement authorities search the computers of a San Diego security firm that used the Internet to access government and military computers without authorization over the summer. Investigators from the FBI, the Army, and NASA visit the offices of ForensicTec Solutions Inc., seeking details about how the company gained access to computers at Fort Hood in Texas and at the Energy Department, NASA, and other government facilities. In an appeal examining the extent of a distributor’s liability in peer-to-peer file-sharing cases, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issues a partial ruling supporting the position of the Grokster and StreamCast networks.

Version 7.2 of the Netscape Mail and Newsgroups email and news client is released. The Zotob computer worm continues to cause fatal computer crashes worldwide. The worm only crashes computers running Windows 2000 as well as early versions of Windows XP, rebooting infected computers endlessly. Among the major organizations affected by the worm are ABC Television, CNN, and the New York Times. Because the three are among the largest media outlets in the nation, the worm, which has a relatively narrow distribution when compared to previous viruses, received a disproportionate amount of news coverage, making the outbreak seem like a major incident. Dell announces that, beginning in September, Dell Dimension desktop computers will feature AMD processors and that later in the year Dell will release a multi-processor servers featuring AMD Opteron processors,. The move represents a break from the company’s long tradition of using only Intel processors. Two year prior, Dell President and Chief Operating Officer Kevin Rollins had very publicly reaffirmed Dell’s commitment to an exclusively Intel product line, claiming that Dell would not use Opterons or Athlon processors.

The celebrities, who belong to the LGBT community, said their lives were inexorably constricted and their rights infriged upon by such a provision. The Sup­reme Court judgment, dated August 24, 2017, which declared privacy a fundamental right, had brought cheer to the community and raised their hopes. A petition was filed by Supreme Court lawyer Charu Wali Khanna challenging the constitutional validity of Article 35A which confers special rights and privileges to the permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir. The Supreme Court also included a petition filed by the Delhi-based NGO, We the Citizen, challenging this Article. Common Cause, an NGO, has filed an appeal for allowing a person suffering from terminal illness to execute his “living will”, indicating that he should not be kept on life support if there was no hope of cure. The NGO argued that Article 21, which guarantees right to life, also includes right to die peacefully.

A bipartisan coalition of elite Supreme Court lawyers submitted a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee supporting Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court. Many regular Supreme Court advocates are featured among the signers, with at least one notable exception. Some commentators have criticized letter-writing of this sort. The lead signatory on the letter is Lisa Blatt, a self-professed progressive feminist who leads the Supreme Court practice at Arnold & Porter. Other liberals who have expressed support for Kavanaugh’s confirmation include Yale Law School professor Akhil Amar, widely considered a leading authority on constitutional matters. While Blatt is lead signer, Republicans are thick among the other signatories, who include Bush administration solicitors general Ted Olson, Paul Clement and Gregory Garre. Miguel Estrada, a Bush nominee to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and Paul Larkin, a seasoned Supreme Court practitioner now affiliated with the Heritage Foundation, also signed the letter. Notably absent from the list is Neal Katyal of Hogan Lovells, who served as acting solicitor general during the Obama administration. Katyal regularly litigates around high-profile liberal causes. He last appeared in the Supreme Court on April 25 to argue against the legality of President Donald Trump’s travel sanctions. Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings before the judiciary committee will begin on Sept. Send tips to kevin@dailycallernewsfoundation.org. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

I don’t pretend to cover Minnesota law here; I am not licensed in Minnesota. However, I wrote about the case of McKee v. Laurion here before, back in 2011 (Doctor sues patient?) and, yesterday, the Minnesota Supreme Court entered an opinion in that case that, presumably, will bring that matter to a close. The case arose when Dennis Laurion’s father, Kenneth Laurion, was hospitalized in Duluth after suffering a hemorrhagic stroke. Dr. David McKee, a neurologist, was called in for a consult. Kenneth apparently recovered; the extent of Dr. McKee’s contributions, if any, to this happy outcome appear to be beyond the scope of this case. This case, rather, is about how Dennis responded to Dr. McKee’s initial consultation. Dennis thought the doctor’s manner brusque and rude and he said so on a number of what the Minnesota Supreme Court calls “‘rate-your-doctor’ websites.” Dennis wrote (slip op. My father spent 2 days in ICU after a hemorrhagic stroke. He saw a speech therapist and a physical therapist for evaluation. About 10 minutes after my father transferred from ICU to a ward room, Dr. McKee walked into a family visit with my dad.

He seemed upset that my father had been moved. Dennis also sent a number of letters to “medically-affiliated institutions” making substantially the same complaints. But the online postings are the focus of Justice Alan Page’s opinion (yes, that Alan Page) and they are the focus of this post as well. McKee sued Dennis for his negative reviews, charging that Dennis had made 11 defamatory statements and interfered with McKee’s business. After some discovery, Dennis sought and obtained summary judgment. On appeal, the Minnesota Court of Appeals (2012 Minn. The Minnesota Supreme Court set out these statements at p. ● Statement 2: Dr. McKee said, “44% of hemorrhagic strokes die within 30 days. ]t doesn’t matter” that the patient’s gown did not cover his backside. ● Statement 5: Dr. McKee left the room without talking to the patient’s family. ● Statement 6: A nurse told Laurion that Dr. McKee was “a real tool! As to statements 1, 2 & 4, the Minnesota Supreme Court found that there was no question of fact about the falsity of these statements.

When the court compared what Dr. McKee said he said with how Dennis quoted him, the court concluded that any minor inaccuracies were not actionable. While, for example, Dr. McKee insisted that he never quoted a percentage with regard to how many hemorrhagic stroke victims die within 30 days, he admitted that he told the family that some of these patients do die. The “presence, absence, or inaccuracy of a specific percentage within this statement, without more” casts Dr. McKee in no more “negative light than does his discussion of patients dying.” (Slip. Therefore, there was no question of fact regarding the falsity of the statement and it could not support a defamation claim. As to statements 3, 5 & 6, the Minnesota Supreme Court found that these did not convey a “defamatory meaning” as a matter of law (slip op. Calling someone a “tool” is hardly complimentary, but “an opinion amounting to ‘mere vituperation and abuse’ or ‘rhetorical hyperbole'” cannot be the basis for a defamation action (slip op. There was an issue as to whether or not there really was a nurse who expressed this opinion to Dennis, the possibility that she might not exist would not make a non-actionable statement attributed to her any more actionable. Solaia Technology, LLC v. Specialty Publishing Co., 221 Ill.

Sections 23 and 29 of the NDPS Act- Essential ingredients of section 23 of NDPS Act. Head Note: As per the wording of the section there must be import of the contraband to attract punishment under this section but the prosecution could not prove that the Ganja was of foreign origin. Even prosecution could not prove whether the substance so seized was actually Ganja or not because no chemical examination report has been produced in the court in original form neither the chemical examiner was examined to prove them. It has also been submitted that the mandatory provision of, sections 42, 52 and 57 of the act has not been strictly complied with. That apart it has also been submitted that there is no independent witness to support the recovery of contraband and the prosecution failed to examine them. 1. Aggrieved by the judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 359 of 2003 of the High Court of Patna, the instant appeal is preferred by the Union of India. 3. The sole respondent along with two other accused was tried for offences under Sections 23 and 29 of the NDPS Act.

The trial court found the respondent herein guilty of an offence under Section 23 of the NDPS Act but found that the charge under Section 29 of the Act is not proved against him. He was, therefore, convicted for an offence under Section 23 of the NDPS Act and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lakh for an offence under Section 23 of the NDPS Act. 4. The High Court, allowed the appeal of the respondent and set aside his conviction under Section 23 of the NDPS Act. “17. So far as appellant Sheo Shambhu Giri of Cr. Appeal No. 359 of 2003 is concerned he has also assailed his conviction on many grounds including that the Ganja was recovered from his possession. 6. The learned counsel further assailed the conclusion of the High Court that the prosecution could not prove that the material seized from the respondent was ganja. 8. We agree with the submission made by the respondent on the construction of Section 23 of the NDPS Act, the expression “tranships” occurring therein must necessarily be understood as suggested by the learned counsel for the respondent. There is yet another reason apart from the construction of the language of Section 23 which compels us to accept the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent. Section 9(1)(a)(vii) also employs the expression transhipment. “9. Power of Central Government to permit, control and regulate. 10. Therefore, the High Court rightly concluded that the conviction of the respondent under Section 23 of the NDPS Act cannot be sustained. We see no reason to interfere with the same. 11. In view of such conclusion, we do not deem it necessary to examine the correctness of other conclusions recorded by the High Court for acquitting the respondents. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

How to Photograph Tourist Sites in Washington, D.C. Quick now, what’s the most photographed city in the United States? New York, Houston, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Chicago, Boston, Baltimore or Miami? It’s true they all have their major attractions. They all also draw hundreds of thousands of visitors each year. The champion however, is our nation’s capitol, Washington, D.C., which can draw millions of visitors per week. This is especially true in association with special events like a visiting dignitary, a protest march, congressional hearing on a controversial topic or a presidential event. In fact there are so many tourist sites in Washington, D.C. So what will it be then; DC tourist sites, museums, government buildings and monuments, nature, the rich, powerful or famous, or the bustling life of the people? The Top Washington, D.C. When visiting the nation’s capitol, be sure to carve out at least a bit of time for some of the top Washington, D.C.

How to Photograph Buildings in Washington, D.C. Tourist sites in Washington, D.C. So let’s consider for a moment how to photograph buildings. First of course, a wide angle lens might come in handy for very tall or wide, expansive buildings. The Obama family’s new home located at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW is a good example. In addition to the main two-story (above ground) residential building, there are a functioning roof patio, along with East and West wings, or extensions, added onto the original White House structure. The building has 130 rooms. There are also a number of high-security floors below ground as well. This professional technique works well for tall or distant buildings and monuments too. This same technique allowed me to compose the image posted above of the Capitol building even though I was more than a mile away. You can easily get great images of tall buildings and monuments, not by getting close, but by moving well away from your subject and zooming back in for your image.

Photographing People in Washington, D.C. People can be fascinating to photograph anywhere. Due to its highly international nature and scope, Washington, D.C. Tourists come from far and wide and the locals too, can make for unique photographic opportunities. Ask for permission when photographing people, even if you “get the shot first” as with the surrey driver pictured below. Often people will consent and ask to be sent a digital copy via e-mail. Be sure to keep your promise to send the photos. Tourist in native dress and children marveling at the wonders of the myriad of Washington, D.C. When photographing people, remember to fill the frame, avoid “busy” backgrounds and be respectful of others’ rights and privacy. The use of shadow in the foreground to focus attention on the sunlit Supreme Court building improves the composition interest. The three woman silhouetted in the foreground lend a sense of scale to the building image as well. The “rule of thirds” is also applied here with the people near one intersection and the lower third of the image in shadow. The building column tops run approximately along the upper third of the image. Using the “rule of thirds”, the image is divided vertically and horizontally into thirds with a tic-tac-toe grid. Image focal points are then located at the intersection of one or more of the four grid intersections. This allows for stronger, more interesting photographic compositions and avoids “centering” of the subject or dividing of the image “in half”, both of which weaken photographic composition of digital images. How to Photograph Washington, D.C. Whether you opt for photographs of people like this surrey driver taking a break, flora, fuana, Washington, D.C. Washington, D.C. offer challenges and rewards to all digital photographer skill levels. Just remember to say “Hello” to the first family from me. I’d like a bullet-riddled target from the FBI firing range too, while you’re at it, or at least send me a picture, okay?

Holding that reasons are the heart-beat of any judgment, the Supreme Court in a recent decision has set to terms the procedure required to be observed by all courts in the country. Setting aside a decision of the High Court for want of reasoning, the Court referred to various earlier decisions and the consistent reiteration of the principles relating to assigning of reasons while disposing of a particular matter. 8. We do find that there is substance in the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner before us. It would have been desirable if the High Court would have recorded some reasons for rejecting the Revision Petition preferred by the Department. 9. The increasing institution of cases in all Courts in India and its resultant burden upon the Courts has invited attention of all concerned in the justice administration system. 10. The Supreme Court in the case of S.N. ], while referring to the practice adopted and insistence placed by the Courts in United States, emphasized the importance of recording of reasons for decisions by the administrative authorities and tribunals.