Kelo v. City of New London was a case that peaked my interest. To me, this is a classic case of government overreach. Let us start from the beginning. In 1997 Susette Kelo purchased a home in the historic neighborhood of Fort Trumbull in New London, Connecticut. She had always dreamed of owning a home on the water and painstakingly restored it to it 's former glory. Pfizer, the pharmaceutical giant, had decided to build a factory near Fort Trumbull with plans to expand their business into the nearby neighborhood. The prodigious pharmaceutical giant gained the support of the city of New London and Under the eminent domain clause. Under the guise of economic development, the New London Development Corporation proceeded to seize not only Susette
Williamson v. City of Houston, 148 F. 3d 462, Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit (1998) Facts: Linda Williamson worked as a police officer in a specialized division in the Houston Police Department. Williamson alleged a coworker, Doug McLeod, engaged in harassing behavior that created a hostile work environment for eighteen months. McLeod continued the harassing behavior after she told him it was offensive and to stop. Williamson reported McLeod’s harassment to their supervisor, Sergeant Bozeman.
Klopfer vs North Carolina In 1967, Peter Klopfer, was an African-American biology professor at the University of Duke in North Carolina. One evening, he was present at a nonviolent sit in; which lead to his arrest later on for trespassing. This incident lead him all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court on March 13.
I Introduction In McCloy v New South Wales, the High Court upheld the validity of provisions in the Electoral Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 (NSW) that imposes caps on political donations, prohibits donations from property developers and restricts indirect campaign contributions in New South Wales. The majority did so on the grounds that whilst each of the provisions burdened the implied freedom of political communication, they had been enacted for legitimate purposes and hence, did not impermissibly infringe upon the implications within the Commonwealth Constitution.
The case of wickard v filburn was about a was a small farmer in the state of Ohio who decides to grow extra wheat for his personal use and to feed his livestock. He got in trouble with the law because he grew too much wheat now can you believe that. Mr.filburn decides to take the situation to the supreme court wondering why or what did he do to get in trouble for harvested nearly 12 acres of wheat, the supreme court penalized him although he argued for his rights along with asking what he did wrong.
According to Dent v. City of Dallas, the court ruled that police officers performing discretionary duties in good faith and acting within the course and scope of their employment are immune from personal liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity. The question that is presented in this situation is whether or not the police officer was acting within his course and scope of his employment. As a nation we have endowed our police officers with the right and authority to enforce the laws on whom they choose. Whether or not we reach the realization to this reality however is another story. The police officer has to use his ability on whom to arrest and not arrest responsibly because his actions do affect society.
The 5 who had been jail sued New York City in 2003 for malicious prosecution. They also included racial discrimination, and emotional distress in the law suits. The city refused to settle the suits for a decade under then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg. It is hard for the city to say we mess up on an grand scale because the city 's lawyers felt they would win. However, after Bill de Blasio became Mayor and supported the settlement.
Robert Jordan, along with 500 others, took a written test for consideration to be a police officer in one of several cities and towns in southeastern Connecticut on March 16, 1996 (Jordan v. City of New London, 1999). The test was administered by “LEC” which is the Law Enforcement Council of Southeastern Connecticut, Inc. (Jordan v. City of New London, 1999). For the participating police departments, this test was used as an initial screener for likely candidates (Jordan v. City of New London, 1999). This written test utilized the Wonderlic Personnel Test and Scholastic Level Exam (WPT), which claim to gage cognitive aptitude (Jordan v. City of New London, 1999). This test actually came with a handbook that showcased recommended scores for particular jobs such a police officer and warned that higher scores needed for a job could prevent that opportunity (Jordan v. City of New London, 1999).
Thesis Green v. New Kent County was an important court case from 1968 dealing with desegregation in schools. Calvin Green convinced the court to establish the laws from Brown v. Board of Ed into action, giving better opportunities to all students of all races. Background Charles C. Green attended George W. Watkins school during Green v. New Kent. Schools across Virginia didn’t acknowledge the rules set in Brown, two of them being George W. Watkins for black students and New Kent for whites.
In the 1940s, a number of situations and events occurred having to do with American government that were met with mixed opinions. The main issue that factored into many of those was racism, which some encouraged and others hated. Racism was for some a large constraint on the educational front. One such example was when a Latino family with the last name Mendez were not allowed to enroll their children into a school for whites because of their race. They did not think that was reasonable.
Yelda Khorsabad Court, who is a Human-Headed Winged Bull (Lamassu), a huge sculpture that makes you feel tiny compared to it. It is a Neo-Assyrian sculpture from 721-705 B.C. The material used to make this sculpture is gypsum alabaster. Before, it was located in Dur-Sharrukin, which is now called Khorsabad, Iraq. In 1929, the statue was relocated to Chicago.
On January 15th, 2018, the defendant, Mary Taylor, was accused of refusing to serve the plaintiff, Brianna Banks, at Mary’s Diner located in downtown Atlanta. Ms Banks, an African American woman, claimed that she walked into the diner, sat herself as customers were directed to do, and, after 20 minutes of waiting in the diner during what she described as a “slow time”, was not helped by Ms Taylor. Banks then proceeded to get up from her table, caused a loud altercation with the hostess at the diner, accusing the business of being racist and claiming that “if her skin was white, she would have been helped within seconds”, and then exited the establishment. After leaving the diner, Brianna Banks went home and did some research on Mary Taylor,
In the case of State v. Barrett (1996), a drug detection team was brought in to conduct a random drug search of the high school on May 3, 1995 in St. Tammany Parish. Six classes were chosen by the principal, who had mentioned some of the selected classes were known to have some of the "problem" students, including the 18 year-old defendant. During the third classroom search, the defendant 's classroom, students were asked to empty their pockets and leave the room. The dogs were brought in and one of the dog 's alerted a smell on the defendant 's wallet. After the principal searched the wallet and found $400 in cash, he placed it in a different location, which the dog alerted on once again.
T.L.O. Vs The State of New Jersey Persuasive Essay This is a case about a High School student’s Fourth Amendment rights being violated. The Fourth Amendment states that the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Do students have a right to personal privacy when caught breaking school rules?
Title: Mendez v. Westminster (1946) Abstract: The Mendez v. Westminster (1946) was the stepping stone to ending school segregation in California. The lawsuit was led by Gonzalo Mendez and five other parents who were denied enrollment of their children in an Anglo school. This led them to protest and then file a class-action lawsuit against the Westminster School District of Orange County California. Accusing them of segregating Mexican and Latin decent students.
Karla Coronel Chapter 20 Problems 6) In my opinion the director is not responsible for the destroyed antiquity. For the following reasons: The agent's careless actions were not within his job. If the agent acts negligently out of his employment with the principal, the principal is not liable for damages caused by the actions of the agent.