Introduction On October 15th I ventured to the Hall of Justice to attend a small claims trials. When I arrived it was a huge building and I knew I was going to get lost. After finding my way to the small claims departments by the help of a nice lawyer, I sat and waited for about an hour. As 20 other students and myself, waited for the cases to begin a woman that worked with the courts, came out and also introduced herself as one of the business teachers at the University of San Diego said that most of the cases were going into mediation, or an alternate form of dispute aimed to negotiate settlements for the issue at hand through use of a mediator, or unbiased party. She also explained that all small claims were all valued at no more than …show more content…
Getty. Getty was an oil company founded by J. Paul Getty. Caroline Getty, Anne Getty Earhart, and Clair E. Getty, are the daughters of George F. Getty II, the departed son of J. Paul Getty and according to the case they are “the current income and presumptive remainder beneficiaries under the Declaration of Trust of Sarah Getty, J. Paul Getty’s mother” (Getty v. Getty 1988). Plaintiff Gordon P. Getty, son of J. Paul, is “a trustee of the estate and an income beneficiary. The other appellants, were children of Gordon, and are contingent beneficiaries under the declaration of trust” (Getty v. Getty 1988). The “... to preserve the business [Getty Oil Company] and always to build up, consolidate and hold control of it as a growth enterprise and never by an means to dissipate that control or any part of it.” (Getty v. Getty (1972) 28 Cal.App.3d 966, 1000 [105 Cal.Rptr. 259].) The trust estate was mainly 40.2% of stock of the Getty Oil Company and per the agreement of the trust Sarah and J. Paul wished that it would never be sold unless a situation were to arise where there would be astounding losses. Gordon Getty was the largest of the shareholders. Meanwhile Pennzoil made an “informal but binding contract with Getty Oil to purchase the company” (Jeffrey 2008). Texaco then attempted to acquire Getty, and in return was sued by Pennzoil for intentionally interfering with contractual relations or, tortious interference. On February 17th, 1984 sole trustee, Gordon Getty sold the stocks of Texaco for over $4 billion. The daughters of George Getty II filed a petition to remove Gordon P. Getty as trustee because the sale of stock violated the terms of the trust. They On November 13th, 1986, the daughters again petitioned for temporary removal and suspension of powers of the trustee, and the selection of a “trustee ad litem” also known as a court appointed trustee. The court found conflicts of interest of trustee Gordon,
This consolidated appeal arises out of a declaratory judgment action, a foreclosure action, and a motion for possession of property initiated in the Circuit Court for Howard County. Mortgagor Sirina Sucklal (“Sucklal”), appellant, challenges the grant of summary judgment to the substitute trustees Mark H. Wittstadt, and Gerard Wm. Wittstadt, Jr. (collectively, “Substitute Trustees”), the ratification of the foreclosure sale, and the subsequent grant of a motion for judgment awarding possession to the purchasers at the foreclosure sale. On appeal, Sucklal presents six questions for our review, which we have condensed and rephrased as follows: 1.
The Plaintiff did not fulfill her contractual obligation to negotiate her claim with the Defendant prior to filing the lawsuit. The Defendant affidavit is attached herein. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing fact, and as the Plaintiff did not fulfill her contractual obligations, Defendant requests the Court to dismiss this case complying with forgoing New York federal court decision. Date: New York, New York June 18,
On appeal, ALC argued that the agreement bound Drury because his mother was a third-party beneficiary of
Bank & Trust Co. v. Dooley, 480 So. 2d 842, 844 (La. App. 2d Cir. 1985) the court reasoned that since the wife spent a considerable amount of money on home improvement, the debt was for the common interest of the community. In this case, the defendant borrowed money from a bank.
The Standard Oil Company caused this by not being honest with their trustees and made them accept unfair offers. John D. Rockefeller stated to them, that anyone who refused his offer would be run into bankruptcy. He also stated that after running them into bankruptcy he would make sure to cheaply buy their estates at any auction held. We notice this when a competitor complains to the government by saying, “My refinery has been shut down during the past three years, owing up to the powerful and all-prevailing machinations of the Standard Oil Trust... I have had to consequently shut down, with my business absolutely ruined and my refinery idle."
In his role as personal representative, Mr. Jones owed a statutory and reasonable duty to protect the assets of the estate while trying to wind down the estate, and Mr. Jones breached that duty by failing to exercise due diligence to perform and complete the tasks required of him in the capacity of personal
Khalil Franklin: Response paper; Murphy, Marshaling the Court: the leadership and bargaining, and the judicial process. Decision-making power of individual justices is shared among them. Given the authority of each individual justice, one must persuade only four of his colleagues, but also to sign on to the majority opinion [see page 2]. To measure political leadership, the role of the chief justice can be studied on the basis of political leadership. Personality spectrum.
A veteran litigator with experience as both a defense counsel and a prosecutor, James B. Greer of Randall | Greer, PLLC, represents clients in complex commercial litigation cases. From his offices in Dallas, Texas, Mr. Greer represents clients in matters related to business litigation, banking law and class action suits, appearing in federal and state courts throughout the nation. Former clients have included major financial institutions, investors and oil and gas operators. He has been recognized repeatedly as one of the state 's top litigators by Texas Monthly Magazine. Prior to earning his Juris Doctor from Baylor Law School, Mr. Green completed his undergraduate studies at Millsaps College, graduating magna cum laude.
David Feige’s Indefensible: One Lawyer’s Journey nto the Inferno of American Justice invites people from all walks of life to a second hand experience of the criminal justice system hard at work. What is most interesting about Feige’s work is its distinct presentation of the life of a public defender in the South Bronx. Instead of simply detailing out his experiences as a public defender, Feige takes it a step further and includes the experiences of his clients. Without the personal relationships that he carefully constructs with each of his defendants, Feige would not be able to argue that the criminal justice system is flimsy at best, decisions always riding on either the judge’s personal attitudes or the clients propensity towards plea bargaining.
Anne Elizabeth Cohen is Of Counsel to Debevoise & Plimpton LLP. , having retired as a Partner from the firm’s Litigation Department in 2013. For almost twenty-eight years, her wide-ranging practice focused on complex tort litigation and internal investigations and she represented defendants in firearms, Agent Orange, smoking and health, toxic shock syndrome, pharmaceutical and asbestos cases. Anne grew-up in Cincinnati and had been a reporter for the Cincinnati Post before deciding to practice law. She received her A.B. from Smith in 1976 and an M.S.L. from Yale Law School in 1982, where she studied for a year as a Ford Foundation fellow while on leave from the Post.
Although state laws regulated the activity of companies, there were no federal laws that did. Large companies, such as Standard Oil, took over the markets and gained extreme wealth through vertical and horizontal consolidation. Yet, many large corporations reached immense success through the corrupt bribing system. A letter from the SP’s representative in Washington was leaked making it clear that he considered members of Congress to be for sale. He stated, “It costs money to fix things so that I would know his bill would not pass.
Many legal challenges exist for case managers but documentation is big liability issue. We have to think because a case manager works in diverse roles were there are potential legal and ethical challenges that exist around every corner. Reading the article regarding liability and case management one of things the article mention is deciding on care for patients when it comes to cost saving without regard to the treatment regimen.” It is important that a case manager not make decision based on the economic status of client but do comparison shopping for the right care for the client. Other areas of liabilities is the lack of following up with all the health care providers who are involve in managing different parts of the patient care.
The judge dismissed an attempt to collect sanctions from the Marshall family over the tactics they and their lawyers had employed during the lengthy litigation over the estate. Dannielynn Birkhead, who once stood to inherit millions, could end up inheriting nothing despite her mother 's attempts to contest Marshall 's will, as well as her attempts to sue his son, and then his son 's estate, for
Nils Christie’s view on modern law is that due to specialization, victims have lost the right to participate in their trials. Lawyers are becoming too involved in cases, taking conflicts away from parties and turning them into property. Christie states there there is less attention focused on the effects on the victim and more focus on the criminal’s background. Christie also states that getting a court to function is difficult while there are specialists present. According to Christie, parties become uneasy with handling their own social conflicts where they know there are professionals present who they believe can do a better job.
Alex Frost Values: Law & Society 9/23/2014 The Hollow Hope Introduction and Chapter 1 Gerald Rosenberg begins his book by posing the questions he will attempt to answer for the reader throughout the rest of the text: Under what conditions do courts produce political and social change? And how effective have the courts been in producing social change under such past decisions as Roe v. Wade and Brown v. Board of Education? He then works to define some of the principles and view points 'currently' held about the US Supreme court system.