Supreme Court Institute Annual Report, 2013-2014

During the 2013-2014 academic year–corresponding to the U.S. Supreme Court’s October Term (OT) 2013–the Supreme Court Institute (SCI) provided moot courts for advocates in 96% of the cases heard by the Court this Term, offered a variety of programs related to the Supreme Court, and further integrated the moot court program into the education of Georgetown Law students. A list of all SCI moot courts held in OT 2013–arranged by argument sitting and date of moot and including the name and affiliation of each advocate and the number of student observers–follows the narrative portion of this report

Opinion of the Judges of the Supreme Court relative to the right of a Husband to Vote on his Wife’s Real Estate [Given March 30, 1878].

The Rhode Island State Supreme Court issued this opinion in response to the question of “Can a husband, under the State constitution, Article II, Section 1, be entitled to vote by virtue of any right or interest which he may have as husband in the real estate of his wife, and if so, under what circumstances?” Rhode Island State law at the time required its citizens to own property of a certain value in order to vote. The point in question was can a husband use his wife’s property to qualify as a voter.https://digitalcommons.providence.edu/ri_history/1003/thumbnail.jp

Supreme Court Institute Annual Report, 2010-2011

During the 2010-2011 academic year--corresponding to the U.S. Supreme Court’s October Term (OT) 2010--the Supreme Court Institute (SCI) provided moot courts for advocates in over 93% of the cases heard by the Court this Term; sponsored a range of programming related to the Supreme Court; and hosted delegations of lawyers and judges visiting from Britain, Rwanda, Kosovo, Korea, China, and Germany. A list of all SCI moot courts held in OT 2010, listed by sitting and date of moot and including the name and affiliation of each advocate and the number of student observers, follows the narrative portion of this report

Supreme Court Institute Annual Report, 2014-2015

During the 2014-2015 academic year-–corresponding to the U.S. Supreme Court’s October Term (OT) 2014-–the Supreme Court Institute (SCI) provided moot courts for advocates in 100% of the cases heard by the Supreme Court, offered a variety of programs related to the Supreme Court, and continued to integrate the moot court program into the education of Georgetown Law students. A list of all SCI moot courts held in OT 2014-–arranged by argument sitting and date of moot and including the name and affiliation of each advocate and the number of observers-–follows the narrative portion of this report

Unsigned letter to John Prince from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, January 10, 1838

This unsigned letter was written on behalf of the five justices of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The scribe criticizes one of the court\u27s employees, most likely John Prince, for indulging to excess in the use of ardent spirit and threatens him with the loss of his appointment. Evidently the problem resolved itself, for Shaw served as Chief Justice for thirty years, from 1830 to 1860. Prince responds to this message in a letter dated January 12, 1838, which is also part of this collection. This item also includes a typescript of the letter annotated by Arthur P. Rugg, associate justice (1906-1911) and chief justice (1911-1938) of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DSTS and Modeling Tools Report

MK16 Fostering Evidence-Based IWRM in the Stung Pursat Catchment (Tonle Sap Great Lake) CambodiaDecision Support Tools (DSTs) have been developed by various organisations (government agencies, international organizations, NGOs, universities, consultancy companies and think tanks) to facilitate decision making around a number of issues, including water governance and management. There are arange of DSTs, distinguished by their function, quality of services (accuracy and precision), ease of use, time of application (project planning, implementation, monitoring, etc.), data requirements, data generated and other factors. The main objective of this analysis is to assess currently available and relevant decision support tools (DSTs), and to highlight the method of selecting most appropriate tool