amendment7

7

1. Elizabeth Frye 2.GRANFINANCIERA, S. A. v. NORDBERG, 1989 3. This court was challenged because the of how GRANFINANCIERA rights were violated. When he requested a jury trial the court disagreed. He was sued in filing for benkrupcy and the Constitution says that when filing for bankrupcy you have the right to a jury trial. 4. the District Courts diagreed with his appeal and his was guilty. he brought it up to the appelletes court and they reversed the decision of the District court. 5. The decision of the appeals court agreeded with him and reversed the decision. I do not think this case has an impact on our lives,except reasure our right to trial by jury.

1. Matt Drozd 2. Duncan v. Louisiana 3. Since his crime was a misdemeanor he was not tried by a jury but a municipal judge 4. The supreme court found that his right to a trial by jury had been violated 5.

Ali is doing __Ex Parte Milligan 1866

U.S. v. SALERNO Tom hildebrand__

1. Mark Donahue 2. Slocum v. New York Life Ins. Co. 1913 [|here] 3. In this case, Slocom sued for medical insurance policy purposes. the jury found in favor of the Insurance Company, but Slocom tried to sue again. 4. The court found that that Slocom's reasons were not valid enough and was outvoted on a four to five decision. 5. This amendment pretty much puts a contradiction in your head when you think about it. If someone finds a law after the case has been decided, it should be re-thought. Then again, if one side of the case doesn't come up with a decision in time, it's really their own fault. Now there were no second chances in the court.

oing Santa Clara co. v. Sothern Pacific R.R. co.

5. This decision ment that all citizens may be provided a lawyer if they can't afford one regardless of the crime.
 * 1) Maria Nocerino
 * 2) Gibeon vs Wainright, 1963
 * 3) Gibeon's right to fair trial was violated.
 * 4) He was given a lawyer and the Supreme Court found him innocent.

1.Tayler Bramley //2.Daniels v. United States 1994 3.The reason why the amendment was challenged is because Daniels was convicted o//f being a felon in possession of a firearm. 4.He was put in jail for 176 months. 5.The decision meant that if a prior conviction used to enhance a federal sentence is no longer open to direct or collateral attack in its own right because the defendant failed to pursue those remedies while they were available

//ana is doing// [|**Baltimore & Carolina Line, Inc. v. Redman**]-(1935) Cameron K is doing Beacon Theatres v. Westover (1959)

Kelly Giardina is doing BELL V. BURSON, (1971) 1.Kelly Giardina 2.Bell v. Burson (1971) 3. there was a car accident 4. Georgia may decide to withhold suspension until adjudication of an action for damages brought by the injured party. Indeed, Georgia may elect to abandon its present scheme completely and pursue one of the various alternatives in force in other States. 6 Finally, Georgia may reject all of the above and devise an entirely new regulatory scheme. 5. the decision is that there is damages by the ingured party so the other people will have to pay for the damages.