PROJECT JURISPRUDENCE

Mugler v. Kansas, 123 U.S. 623 (1887), was an important United States Supreme Court case in which the 8–1 opinion of Associate Justice John Marshall Harlan and the lone partial dissent by Associate Justice Stephen Johnson Field laid the foundation for the Supreme Court's later acceptance and defense during the Lochner era of Justice Field's theory of economic substantive due process under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The companion case was Kansas v. Ziebold & Hagelin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mugler_v._Kansas. THE constitution of the State of Kansas contains the following article, being art. 15 of § 10, which was adopted by the people November 2, 1880: "The manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors shall be forever prohibited in this State, except for medical, scientific, and mechanical purposes." The legislature of Kansas enacted a statute to carry this into effect, the provisions of which are set forth by the court in its o

EN BANC: [G.R. No. L-45748. April 5, 1939. 67 Phil. 190)] THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellant, vs. FRANCO VERA REYES, defendant-appellee. IMPERIAL, J.: The defendant was charged in the Court of First Instance of Manila by the assistant city fiscal with a violation of Act No. 2549, as amended by Acts Nos. 3085 and 3958 The information alleged that from September 9 to October 28, 1936, and for the some time after, the accused, in his capacity as president and general manager of the Consolidated Mines, having engaged the services of Severa Velasco de Vera as stenographer, at an agreed salary of P35 a month willfully and illegally refused to pay the salary of said stenographer corresponding to the above-mentioned period of time, which was long due and payable, in spite of her repeated demands. The accused interposed a demurrer on the ground that the facts alleged in the information do not constitute any offense, and that even if they did, the laws penalizing it are unconst

FIRST DIVISION: [G.R. No. 167217, February 04, 2008. 567 Phil. 580] P.I. MANUFACTURING, INCORPORATED, Petitioner, vs. P.I. MANUFACTURING SUPERVISORS AND FOREMAN ASSOCIATION and the NATIONAL LABOR UNION, Respondents. SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.: The Court has always promoted the policy of encouraging employers to grant wage and allowance increases to their employees  higher  than the minimum rates of increases prescribed by statute or administrative regulation. Consistent with this, the Court also adopts the policy that requires  recognition  and  validation  of wage increases given by employers either  unilaterally  or as a result of  collective bargaining negotiations  in an effort to correct wage distortions. [1] Before us is a motion for reconsideration of our Resolution dated April 18, 2005 denying the present petition for review on  certiorari  for failure of the petitioner to show that a reversible error has been committed by the Court of Appeals in its (a) Decision dated July 21,