Fresh Or Hot Pursuit: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Government Operations and Metropolitan Affairs of the Committee on the District of Columbia, House of Representatives, Ninety-seventh Congress, Second Session, on H.R. 5503 ... August 19, 1982 |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
1978 REHNQUIST amenable to suit apply Arlington County Police authority award bill Biscoe BLACKMUN California courts Chairman Chisholm citizens civil actions claim Colonel BURACKER committee compensation concern conflict of laws CONGRESS LIBRARY CONGRESS THE LIBRARY consent County Police Department Credit Clause criminal damages decision defendant dissenting 440 U.S. District of Columbia diversity jurisdiction doctrine eleventh amendment employee Fairfax County Faith and Credit FAUNTROY federal courts Federal interest Framers fresh pursuit Full Faith GRAY HALL REHNQUIST home rule hot pursuit HUDSON immunity from suit injuries issue judgment law enforcement legislation LIBRARY OF CONGRES LIBRARY OF CONGRESS limits litigation Maryland negligence Nevada OCTOBER TERM peace unit PITTSBURGH LAW REVIEW plaintiff police officer protection question REHNQUIST require sister South Dakota sover sovereign immunity sovereignty state's statute subcommittee sued Supreme Court testimony Thank tion tort unconsenting UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH Virginia law waived waiver WOLF
Popular passages
Page 123 - It is inherent in the nature of sovereignty not to be amenable to the suit of an individual without its consent. This is the general sense and the general practice of mankind...
Page 105 - The jurisdiction of the nation within its own territory is necessarily exclusive and absolute. It is susceptible of no limitation not imposed by itself.
Page 123 - It is not rational to suppose that the sovereign power should be dragged before a court. The intent is, to enable states to recover claims of individuals residing in other states. I contend this construction is warranted by the words.
Page 30 - ... the appropriate Federal agency and his claim shall have been finally denied by the agency in writing and sent by certified or registered mail. The failure of an agency to make final disposition of a claim within six months after it is filed shall, at the option of the claimant any time thereafter, be deemed a final denial of the claim for purposes of this section.
Page 132 - A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a person, who acts directly or by an agent, as to a [cause of action] [claim for relief] arising from the person's (1) transacting any business in this state...
Page 30 - The head of each Federal agency or his designee, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Attorney General, may consider, ascertain, adjust, determine, compromise, and settle any claim for money damages against the United States for injury or loss of property or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the agency while acting within the scope of his office or employment, under circumstances where the United States, if a private person,...
Page 105 - A sovereign is exempt from suit, not because of any formal conception or obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal right as against the authority that makes the law on which the right depends.
Page 105 - ... validity from an external source, would imply a diminution of its sovereignty to the extent of the restriction, and an investment of that sovereignty to the same extent in that power which could impose such restriction. All exceptions, therefore, to the full and complete power of a nation within its own territories, must be traced up to the consent of the nation itself. They can flow from no other legitimate source.
Page 127 - Nor will you take me to deny that history has weight in the elucidation of the text, though it is surely subtle business to appraise it as a guide. Nor will you even think that I deem precedent without importance, for we...
Page 117 - It is a right that has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized. [The] right finds no explicit mention in the Constitution. The reason, it has been suggested, is that a right so elementary was conceived from the beginning to be a necessary concomitant of the stronger Union the Constitution created. In any event, freedom to travel throughout the United States has long been recognized as a basic right under the Constitution.