Case Of Bob Timberlake Collection Inc. V. Edwards

In the United States 1,625 cases has been wrongfully convicted, for crimes they haven’t done nor have any connections to it. Sedrick Courtney’s is a prime example of wrongfully convicted people. The Case of Sedrick Courtney is form to show how our criminal justice system is corrupt.

McGarry v. Sax, 70 Cal. Rptr. 3d 519 - Cal: Court of Appeal, 3rd Appellate Dist. 2008

Facts: John Watson was a close friends of the defendant’s mother and maintained a friendly report with Terrell. Terrell was on parole at the time of the alleged incident for unrelated charges at the time. The confrontation stemmed from stole checks that Terrell had taken from Watson and begin sharing and using to buy goods. On June 20, 1992, Watson discovered that the checks had been stole and were being used by Terrell and spoke with Terrell’s mother and then summoned the sheriff’s deputy. Watson asked for the charges to not yet be filed until he notified them. Watson and Terrell’s mother agreed to wait to speak with Terrell upon his return and speak with him about restitution of some of the money by the following Monday

The second trial I attended was a personal injury civil jury trial with Judge Carrier. This was a rather interesting case of Jennifer Wolfe VS D & W LLC. Within this case, Jennifer Wolfe attended a bachelorette party eight years ago with her now sister-in-law, who was the maid of honor. The story started out with everyone meeting at a house and the maid of honor was mad that the designated person to bring alcohol, forgot to bring the alcohol. The alcohol drank at this house was whatever was there, which was a few beers and a box of wine. From here, a rented limo picked everyone up and took them to the first bar, where they did not stay long. Witnesses recounts them each having a round of shots and maybe a pitcher of beer. Eventually, the party ended up at a local karaoke bar called Bugsy Malone’s. When the party arrives, Jennifer and her sister-in-law immediately go get drinks. Not long after getting the drinks, a man invites Jennifer to dance with him on a stage. While on the stage, she ends up falling off and breaking her ankle very badly. She had to have pins put in her ankle, that later had to be removed, and will have to have another ankle fusion in

This case was heard in the Superior Court, Orange County, California. The Plaintiff was found guilty, and he filed an appeal to the California Supreme Court, which affirmed, then petitioned to the United States Supreme Court.

The case of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. has opened the door for corporations to deny all kinds of protections and laws to their employees. What if the corporation in question was a car insurance company, and they did not want to cover their employees birth control? Would they still hold the same position if a citizen (or a whole state) claimed religious exemption to being forced to purchase car insurance? When asking if corporations should have religious freedoms, I think the more crucial question is should a corporation be considered a person. This relates to how we interpret the 14th Ammendment of the US Constitution. Only the people within the grouping of the corporation should be considered people and have religious freedom. Also, the rights of one person should never take precedent over, or limit, the rights of another.

plaintiff had not waived their rights to liquidated damages, and that the contract’s extension was

In response to question one of unit 4, I will discuss the facts, issues, as well as court holdings referencing the Roper v. Simmons case of 2005.

The court said that “Dr. Jennings performed his obligations under the employment agreement” and that Jennings followed through with good faith that he would receive his severance; SSM did not follow through with their agreement, which is fraud. SSM argued that they did not because Jennings “failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because the employment agreement included an integration clause. That integration clause, SSM contended, effectively sealed the contract at the time of its signing and constituted the entire agreement of the parties.” By Jennings failing to state a claim, which was a clause in the contract, SSM had the right to not give his severance. The appellant court agreed to SSM’s point. The court back up their reasoning by explaining that in a written contract it “is presumed to be "the final memorial of the parties' agreement” and that the clause in the contract must be followed to complete Jennings’ side of the contract. The court agreed with

Your Honor, the opposing counsel, members of the jury, this case is about the unreliability of evidence and an insufficiency to meet the burden of proof that is required to convict Mr. Jones and Cut-Rate Liquor with a violation of Nita Liquor Commission Regulation 3.102.

The complaint states that on October 14, 2016, plaintiff Kirk Thompson, a UPS driver, delivered a box to defendant Eleanor Lewis at her single-family home in White Plains, New York. When Mr. Thompson placed the box on the front stoop and rang the doorbell, he heard Ms. Lewis’s dog barking and scratching the other side of the door. Mr. Thompson then walked back to his van when he heard a female voice behind him instructing him not to move. As Mr. Thompson turned around, Ms. Lewis’s dog, Simon, bit him on the arm, requiring surgery for Mr. Thompson and him missing six months of work due to his inability to drive.

When a school has specific knowledge of a student’s violent disciplinary record, the school has received constructive notice of the impending harm. In Wood, there was enough to establish breach of duty because the school had been put on notice by the aggressor’s two year long violent disciplinary record. Wood v. Watervliet City Sch. Dist., 815 N.Y.S.2d 360, 362 (2006). For example, in the months leading up to the event, the attacker fought a student in the school cafeteria and threw a chair against the wall of a classroom. The court reasoned that this was constructive notice, and that the school should have intervened when an incident involving the student broke out because they were aware of his “assaultive behavior.” In MacCormack, however,

This was a Civil Case between Wal-Mart v. Betty Dukes et al. accusing the stores of discrimination on the basis of gender (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Betty Dukes (10-277), 2011). Betty Dukes was the plaintiff in this case, together with other women filed for class action for the violation of their civil rights. The lawsuit involved a class of over 1 million women who were Wal-Mart employees after December 1998. Betty Dukes, 54-year-old Wal-Mart worker claimed sexual discrimination based on the claim that in spite of working at the store for six years and with positive reviews on her performance, she was denied the necessary training required to advance to a position of higher salary (Toobin, 2011). The court held

The plaintiff in this case is Douglas Faulk and the defendant is Gold Kist, Inc. The plaintiff, Douglas Faulk owned a pond in which he had stocked approximately 2000 catfish. The pond was supplied by rainwater and runoff from the adjacent land, which included land that Gold Kist, Inc. operated a fertilizer plant on. After realizing a thick layer of scum had filled his pond, and that all of his catfish had died, Faulk sued Gold Kist, Inc. claiming they had committed an alleged trespass to his property, with regard to runoff fertilizer from their bulk plant, which he claims to have created the layer of scum on his pond, and killed all of his fish. The defendant, Gold Kist, Inc., claimed that their company had not committed any such trespass to Faulk’s land. The defendant did not intentionally commit a trespass onto the land, as they were always careful to operate the plant avoiding fertilizer spills, but quickly and thoroughly cleaning any that did occur. The defendant also claimed that the death of Faulk’s fish was not due to runoff via a drainage ditch from his plant, but could have been several other

FACTS: Shelly Zumaya is the president and sole shareholder of Kiwi Corporation (stock basis of $400,000). Kiwi Corporation, incorporated in 2003, is in the business of purchasing and reselling used farming equipment. In December 2012, Kiwi transferred its entire inventory (basis of $1.2 million) to Shelly Zumaya in a transaction that was recorded as a sale. According to Zumaya, the inventory was sold to her for the sum of $2 million, which was the fair market value of the inventory. The terms of the sale stated that Zumaya would pay Kiwi Corporation the $2 million at a future date. This debt obligation was not evidence by