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
08-0316 METHODIST HEALTHCARE SSYTEM OF SAN ANTONIO, LTD., L.L.P. v. RANKIN
No full text08-0316 Methodist Healthcare System of San Antonio Ltd., L.L.P. v. Emmalene Rankin from Bexar County and the Fourth District Court of Appeals, San Antonio For petitioners: Carl Robin Teague and Rosemarie Kanusky, San Antonio For respondent: R. Brent Coop
08-0169 WALTERS v. CLEVELAND REGIONAL MED. CENTER
No full text08-0169 Tangie Walters v. Cleveland Regional Medical Center, et al. from Harris County and the First District Court of Appeals, Houston For petitioner: Christopher Bradshaw-Hull, Houston For respondents: Diana L. Faust, Dallas, and Richard Sheehy, Housto
07-0960 IN THE INTEREST OF B.G., C.W., E.W., B.B.W. AND J.W., CHILDREN
No full text07-0960 In the Interest of B.G., et al. from Angelina County and the 12th District Court of Appeals, Tyler For petitioner: Brent L. Watkins, Lufkin For respondent: Trevor A. Woodruff, Austin The issue in this parental-rights termination is whether Famil
08-0390 MBM FINANCIAL CORP. v. THE WOODLANDS OPERATING CO., L.P.
No full textJustice O'Neil is not sitting. 08-0390 MBM Financial Corp. and Marimom Business Systems Inc. v. The Woodlands Operating Co., L.P. from Montgomery County and the Ninth District Court of Appeals, Beaumont For petitioner: Jennifer Bruch Hogan, Houston For r
07-1065 HAGEN v. HAGEN
No full text07-1065 Raoul Hagen v. Doris J. Hagen from Bexar County and the Fourth District Court of Appeals, San Antonio For petitioner: Ryan G. Anderson, San Antonio For respondent: Gary A. Beahm, San Antonio The issue is whether an action to determine if a 1976 d
Lives in Defense Counsel's Hands: The Problems and Responsibilities of Defense Counsel Representing Mentally Ill or Mentally Retarded Capital Defendants (Comment)
No full textThis Comment will examine the difficulties that counsel and courts have in identifying a defendant's mental illness or mental retardation. The first part of this Comment will review the differences and similarities between mental illness and retardation; address the relevant case law regarding the exemption of the mentally ill and mentally retarded from the death penalty; and then identify the opinions of states, the international community, and organizations regarding the death penalty. The second section of this Comment will examine how counsel ineffectively assist their capital defendants by failing to notice that their client is mentally ill or mentally retarded; failing to raise the issue of the client's mental retardation or mental illness; and failing to present expert testimony regarding their defendant's mental retardation or illness. Finally, the third part of this Comment will provide recommendations to defense counsel and courts to avoid allowing mentally ill and mentally retarded defendants to be sentenced to execution
Gender Segregation in the Public Schools; Opportunity, Inequality, or Both
No full textThis article briefly considers the history of single-sex education, and evaluates concerns that single gender classrooms raise. The article concludes that attempts to allow or impose gender segregation should continue only if empirical studies can demonstrate that benefits outweigh the harm resulting from such segregation. In the absence of such justification, it might be time to curtail the experiment
Whores and Other Sex Slaves: Why the Equation of Prostitution with Sex Trafficking in the William Wilberforce Reauthorization Act of 2008 Promotes Gender Discrimination (Comment)
No full textThis Comment examines potential problems with the next reauthorization of the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act if Congress reintroduces the new sex trafficking language in 2011. It discusses how prostitution is viewed in this country, and argues that strengthening prostitution laws by equating prostitution with sex trafficking augments existing bias against female prostitutes and derails efforts to eliminate sex trafficking. Part II examines why House Bill 3887's proposed amendment is ineffective and discriminatory. The new bill would simultaneously federalize a crime that many do not agree should be punished and would generalize the inability of females to consent to engage in commercial sex. The bill is both discriminatory and unduly punitive. Part III analyzes existing gender bias in the prostitution laws of different states. Because these laws are already facially discriminatory, they should not be strengthened by becoming federal crimes. Part III presents arguments supporting the decriminalization of prostitution in the United States and how this may strengthen women's rights and help eradicate sex trafficking
