As far back as the Magna Carta in 1215, the right of private property was seen as a bulwark of the individual against the arbitrary power of the state. Indeed, common-law tradition holds that "property is the guardian of every other right." And yet, for most of the last seventy years, property rights had few staunch supporters in America. This latest addition to Oxford's Inalienable Rights series provides a succinct, pointed look at property rights in America--how they came to be, how they have evolved, and why they should once again be a mainstay of the law. Richard A. Epstein, the nation's preeminent authority on the subject, examines all aspects of private property--from real estate to air rights to intellectual property. He takes the reader from the strongly protective property rights advocated by the framers of the Constitution through to the weak property rights supported by Progressive and liberal politicians of the twentieth century and finally to our own time, which has seen a renewed appreciation of property rights in the aftermath of the Supreme Court's landmark Kelo v. New London decision in 2005. The author's own powerful defense of property rights threads through the narrative. Using both political theory and economic analysis, Epstein argues that above all that private property is a sound social institution, and not just an excuse for selfishness and greed. Only a system of private property lets people form and raise families, organize religious and other charitable organizations, and earn a living through honest labor. Supreme Neglect offers a compact, incisive look at this hotly contested constitutional right, championing property rights as an essential social institution.
See also Country Community Timberlake Village v. HMW Special Utility District of Harris, 438 S.W.3d 661 (Tex. Ct. App. 2014) (holding that a neighboring ...
After Justin Timberlake exposed Janet Jackson's pierced nipple on national television for 9/16ths of a second, the FCC received over 540,000 complaints.
Volume III: The Chesapeake and New England, 1660-1750 William E. Nelson ... Decision of Law, Surry County Ct. 1673/74, in Eliza Timberlake Davis ed., ...
E. Edwards v. California, 314 U.S. 160 (1941), 66 Edwards v. Housing Authority of City of ... Timberlake, 148 Ind. 38,46 N.E.339 (1897), 69,70 Graves v.
Fitzgerald, 4.08[B][2], 5.05[D] Fitzgerald v. ... Mastrapa-Font, 7.03[A][3] Fontaine, In re, 5.05[D] Fontenette v. ... Frost, 5.05[A] Formato v.
The sole remedy is avoidance, however; damages cannot be claimed under s. ... 17, it places a great deal of power in the hands of insurance companies to ...
Normally, a mate«s receipt would later be given up for a bill of lading, ... they necessarily prejudice the rights of those who deal in the goods ...
27 257 U.S. 184, 42 S. Ct. 72, 66 L. Ed. 189 (1921). ... 38 Argensinger, “Right to Strike”: Labor Organization and the New Deal in Baltimore, 78 MD . HIST .
704 Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017, s. 80. 705 Leith v. Gould [1986] 1 NZLR 760. It is not clear how a New Zealand court would deal with a case such ...
... to meet the reasonable expectations of claimants about how the corporation should deal with them, by, inter alia, ... 7 Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, s.