Sandra Bland Case

United States vs. Martha Stewart and Peter Bacanovic occurred in 2004, and it is often regarded to be one of this century’s most sensational court cases. The trial occurred in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, and Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum presided over the case. Robert G. Morvillo served as Ms. Stewart’s attorney, and Richard M. Strassberg served as the attorney of Mr. Bacanovic. The lead prosecution attorney was Karen Patton Seymour. Perhaps, though, it is best to begin by inspecting the facts of the case.

In November 1997, Casey Martin, a highly talented, professional golfer, filed a suit against the PGA tour. The first hearing took place in the United States District Court in Oregon with a case title Casey Martin, Plaintiff v. PGA Tour, Inc., Defendant (984 F.Supp. 1320). Casey Martin has a rare degenerative circulatory disorder in his right leg that inhibits his ability to walk naturally and can cause severe pain. Martin’s disorder is classified as a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. During the 1997 PGA golf tour, Martin was denied a request to use a golf cart during the third round of the tournament to accommodate his special needs.

In Blake Hurst’s “The Omnivore’s Delusion: Against the Agri-Intellectuals,” he opposes the accusations made by tofu-eating, recycled-toilet-paper-using, self-starving Michael Pollan and his followers. Throughout “The Omnivore’s Delusion…,” Hurst mentions how methods of farming have evolved to match demands of produce. The author states that “Only ‘Industrial farming’ can possibly meet the demands of an increasing population and increased demand for food as a result of growing incomes” (Hurst 4). This quote essentially means that “Industrial Farming” is the most efficient way to farm for today’s population level. A second point that is made by Hurst is that changes made by today’s farming are necessary.

On April 24, 2014, Ella Mae Else, who is the plaintiff, filed a lawsuit against Ford Motor Company, who is the Defendant in the 44th Judicial Court of Dallas County, Texas. In this case Else claims that she was trying to park her 2008 automobile on March 10, 2013 when the throttle got stuck and failed to shift to the neutral position, which caused the vehicle to sped up into the wooden area causing her some injuries. She argues that the accident was Ford’s fault for selling a defective vehicle, therefore Else demand compensation against the defendant due to Strict Liability for Design, Manufacture and Marketing a Defective Product.

Legal Analyses YEAGER v. DICKERSON Synopsis The case was based on Donna Yeager as the plaintiff on attorneys who released medical information in the course of a child custody hearing when Yeager asserts a violation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). The plaintiff claimed of wrongful death, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, invasion of privacy and HIPAA violations as stated on FindLaw. However, the defendants contested that KRS 446.070 does not give Yeager a right of action where a Federal statute preempts state statutes and does not expressly provide such a right (FindLaw, n.d.).

Harte- Hanks Communications v. Connaughton, which took place in 1989, focused around libel laws as well redefining the actual malice standard. Six years prior to the case, Daniel Connaughton ran for Municipal Judge of Hamilton, Ohio, losing to the incumbent James Dolan. Connaughton was ultimately unsuccessful, losing to Dolan, who was supported by JournalNews, a local Ohio paper. It later was revealed that prior to the election, a member of Dolan’s staff resigned his position and was charged with perjury, by a jury.

The calyee Murder case was one of the most interesting cases for the public in 2011 because in this case the mother of child Casey Anthony was suspected. Most of the individuals would have been found guilty in the situation. A parent killing their own child will make any of them guilty at some point of time. Nobody has expected the judgment in favor of Casey Anthony and this might her not feel guilty for the crime she has committed.

Sandra Bland died from the injuries she sustained during the traffic stop beating. On the video, Sandra claimed she suffered from epilepsy,a neurological disorder, while being held down on the pavement. It was possible that Sandra received some brain damage after the assault, resulting in a seizure. This seizure, when left untreated, will result in death. In short, the Police department will and should be held responsible for Sandra 's death.

The coverage of Sandra Bland’s death may reveal some bias as authors with strong opinions on the topic will side with either the authorities who believe Sandra’s death was her own fault or those who believe Sandra’s death was caused by the authorities. The perpetuation of misinformation comes mainly from the authors as they utilize images and quotes that depict one side of the argument unfairly. Sandra Bland was an African American woman who was pulled over and arrested over the failure to signal. Sandra Bland was arrested and placed in jail. Three days later she was found dead hanging in her jail cell.

Title: Current Event Analysis # 5 William Wilson IV-2nd Block-12/27/2015 Grand jury decides against indictments in Sandra Bland’s death Author: Dana Ford and Ed Payne News Source: CNN Date of News Story Publication: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 1. Sandra Bland 2. Sandra Bland’s death 3. Waller County Texas in the jail 4. This story was updated December 23, 2015 5.

From believing that the freedom of speech and press was protection against previous regulations to believing that it to be protection against unnecessary harm to the general public, Holmes changes positions between Patterson v. Colorado and Schenck v. United States. In Patterson v. Colorado, Patterson was fined for publishing a cartoon about an active case of the Supreme Court of Colorado. Believing that his rights protected by the 14th Amendment were infringed, Patterson turned to the Supreme Court to repeal his punishment. Holmes argued that the cartoon was an obstruction of justice.