Northside Blodgett Case Summary

Bennett Barbour was a 22 year old, black male who was charged and convicted of rape in the state of Virginia. Barbour fought for over thirty years o clear his good name. Barbour was sentenced on for the alleged rape on April 15 of the same year. Bennett received a ten-year sentence for which he served four and a half years in prison. Barbour was exonerated on May 24, 2012.

Colin Newmark was diagnosed with cancer. The cancer was life threatening. His parents were Christian Scientists and refused to consent for chemotherapy for Colin. Their refusal was protected under State Law as it exempted parents from the neglect and abuse statutes if the refusal was supported by medical reasons. The plaintiff, Child Protective Services petitioned to continue treatment for Colin.

On July 29, 2003 Detective Jason Leavitt was a part of a decoy operation with an undercover arrest team ; he was dressed on black jeans, a dirty short- sleeved flannel shirt on top of a dirty-t shirt, and a baseball cap to apart as a drunk homeless man . Detective Leavitt carried Twenty one-dollar bills in his breast pocket, to attract a thief. Leavitt was on the block of 200 Main St across from the Greyhound station. The Appellant Richard Miller approached Detective Leavitt on this very street to ask him for money. Detective Leavitt told Miller he was not going to give him an money, Leavitt testified that the appellant put his arm around him and asked him to go get a drink. While doing so Miller took Detective Leavitt twenty dollars, and proceeded to ask him for the money again; but Leavitt told Miller once again no but this time because it was gone. The undercover arrest time pulled up to the scene and took the appellant into custody, he was charged with larceny.

Athletic Director Bob Marcus has quite the challenge in allocating the athletic department funds appropriately throughout all the programs within Oakbend Senior High School. After critically analyzing the case study it was quite clear some sports such as football and girls basketball received much more funding compared to other sports such as cross country and track and field. Throughout this case brief an effective solution that is both fair and in line with the districts mission will be expanded on to assist Bob Marcus is making the necessary budget cuts to provide a successful athletic program in the future.

The question before us is whether the medical examiner found a match between Kelbel and Kailyn Montgomery’s bodily conditions.

This case study presents an incident that occurred in Bridges Bay Public Library. The director of the library, Joseph Calenda, has to decide what should be done about the homeless people, standing in the lobby of the library. Calenda is the manager being graded on in this case study. Due to the cold weather, a group of homeless people stood in the lobby to stay warm. Many of the patrons visiting the library complained about their presence and the director convened a meeting with the department heads to discuss what should be done. They decide to do nothing and the group except for a woman leave when it starts to get warmer outside. The woman left a few hours later. However, the next day she appeared again, with no signs of leaving. A custodian who asked her to leave received a blank stare in response. The patrons’ complaints grew, and another meeting was held. In the meeting, topics such as laws regarding vagrancy and whether to call the police was discussed and debated. The assistant director, Bridget O’Dea, brought up a valid point about the homeless from an ethical standpoint. Her argument is that as a society one should help those who cannot help themselves (). She believes that the library should let the woman stay since she is not doing any

On November 16, 1972, student protestors at Southern University A&M College located in Baton Rouge took place at the campus's administration building. To remove the protestors, deputies and the state police tossed tear gas canisters into the building, which the people threw back out of the windows. Two students were killed during the protest, Denver A. Smith and Leonard D. Brown.

In Arizona, the decision of the court to modify parenting time will often result in a modification of child support. In the case of Heidbreder v. Heidbreder, the Arizona Court of Appeals must determine whether the trial court erred in modifying child support without a modification request from either party, as well as other relevant legal factors pertaining to this particular case: adequate notice and the opportunity to be heard.

Facts of the Case: Monte Durham has an extensive history of imprisonment due to breaking the law and hospitalization due to mental illness after every conviction. In every case, he was deemed of having an unsound mind. After 15 months of treatment, in one particular case, Durham was discharged from the mental hospital and returned to jail to serve the remainder of his sentence. After his release, Durham received a warrant for parole violation and fled the area. He was arrested again for bad checks. He was sent back to the District. Once again, the parole board sent him to a lunacy inquisition hearing where he was readmitted to the hospital. This time the diagnosis was "without mental disorder, psychopathic personality." And he was discharged for the third time.

Tim Bosma was a church going, fun, and caring a son to Mary and Hank Bosma, a husband to Sharlene Bosma, and a father to a five-year- old daughter (Adam Carter and Nil Koksal, 2016). On the evening of May 6, 2013, he was last seen with two men who went for a test drive in a vehicle that Tim was selling. Tim Bosma was shot and stuck into a livestock incinerator located on the accused, Dellen Millard’s, farm and the totality of the evidence provided proof that the remains found were of Tim Bosma (Cambridge Times, 2013). There were three parties to the crime, two accused and an accessory after the fact. Both accused are sentenced to a life of prison and the possibility of parole after 25 years (Paola Loriggio and Liam Casey, 2016). The individual, Noudga, being the accessory after the fact was only given a sentence of 2 years of house arrest after serving 4 years in prison, for pleading guilty to obstructing justice by destroying evidence (Adam Carter, 2016).

Procedural Overview: Metropolitan Housing Development Corporation applied to the Village of Arlington Heights for rezoning land to build a racially integrated, low and moderate housing project. The request was denied and the respondent, MHDC, sued the petitioner, Arlington Heights, for injunctive and declaratory relief on the grounds of racial discrimination. The District Court ruled in favor of the petitioner; however, on appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed the District Court’s decision. The Petitioner appealed to the United States Supreme Court and writ of certiorari was granted.

Goal: Donterius will extensively decrease the frequency and intensity of temper tantrums and convey anger through suitable statements and healthy physical outlets four times a day for three weeks.

Every human has rights to practice their religions. In this week’s reading, we read about the In Re Brown case. This case is about two felonies committed by the 20-year-old daughter Andrea, who shot her mother Mattie Brown, as she was only the eyewitness to the murder Andrea committed. She killed her own father by giving him a rat poison. Mattie brown was taken to the hospital. She needed an immediate surgery and her physician recommended blood transfusion while surgery. Mattie brown wanted to live but denied the transfusion, due to her religions believe, which proscribed blood from others. Mattie was only the eyewitness against Andrea Ruby’s case so hospital performs blood transfusion despite for her religions belief. Mattie Brown insisted

Under the RCW 11.28.120, the persons entitled to letter looks reasonable to me. It started from the closest person in general and goes on. I believe out of all those individuals on the list, one of them will be able to serve in most case before it goes to the court to appoint a person to administer. However, I would probably add an extra individual called “significant others”. In these days, there are many couples whose been together for long time as husband and wife, but choose not to officially get marry. In such case, I think they might end up going to fall under suitable person appointed by the court. I think the court should add the “significant others” on the list, but they will need to prove to the court the relationship between decedent.

Nelson, William A. Healthcare Executive Column. July/August 2005; Making Ethical Decisions: A Six-Step Process Should Guide Ethical Decision Making in Healthcare; Healthcare Management Ethics. July/August