St. Mary's University, Texas
St. Mary's University, San Antonio: St. Mary's Law Digital RepositoryNot a member yet
1503 research outputs found
Sort by
09-0073 MERCK & CO., INC. v. GARZA
No full text09-0073 Merck & Co. Inc. v. Felicia Garza, et al. from Starr County and the Fourth District Court of Appeals, San Antonio For petitioner: Stephen G. Tipps, Houston For respondents: Kevin Dubose, Houston A principal issue is whether clinical-testing evide
Best Brief Contest Winner: Tim Riggins v. United States of America 09-9100 Brief for Petitioner Winner of the 2010 Best Brief Contest at St. Mary's University School of Law
No full textEach year, each Legal Research and Writing faculty member submits one brief from her or his class to the St. Mary s Law Journal editorial board. The board then selects one winner from each 1L section, resulting in four briefs which represent the best bri
09-0399 BP AMERICA PRODUCTION CO. v. MARSHALL
No full text09-0399 BP America Production Co., et al. v. Stanley G. Marshall, et al. from Zapata County and the Fourth District Court of Appeals, San Antonio For petitioner BP America: Thomas R. Phillips, Austin For petitioner Wagner Oil: Pamela Stanton Baron, Austi
10-0048 IN RE BILLY JAMES SMITH
No full text10-0048 In re Billy James Smith Original proceeding for compensation under the Texas Wrongful Imprisonment Act For relator Mr. Smith: Kristopher E. Moore For real party in interest Comptroller of Public Accounts: Philip A. Lionberger, Austin The issue i
The United States' Failure to Ratify the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: Must the Poor Be Always with Us
No full textThis Article proposes that the United States should ratify the ICESCR. The treaty's requirements are to be met over a period of time, according to the abilities of each member state. This ought to eliminate concerns about interference with the United States' sovereignty, and about the methods, costs, and means of implementing the treaty. Part II of this Article provides the context and content of the ICESCR, including its status in the United States. Part III examines the current status of poverty in the United States, and current attempts to address poverty through domestic remedies and legislation. Part IV demonstrates ways in which the ICESCR could effectively address problems faced by poor people in the U. S. Finally, this Article reaches two conclusions from which a solution may follow: there is no legitimate reason for poverty to persist in this country, and the United States is simply out of synch with the rest of the world in its legal approach to poverty. We need not accept poverty as an inevitable fact of life in this country; with the proper legal tools and internalization of the proper norms, we may find that, in fact, we need not always have the poor with us
