The case of the United States vs Miller is an intriguing case to say the least. It started with two men trying to transport sawed off shotguns and ended with a little bit of blood and some prison time. This was a case best explain by Doctor Brian L Frye in his paper The Peculiar Story of United States vs. Miller.
Stakeholders have an interest in an organisation and they are affected by all decisions and actions taken by an organisation to attain its objectives. Stakeholders can be internal or external to the organisation. Stakeholder relationships are categorised in to the following four categories participative, collaborative, informative and defending. (Anon., 2017)
This case study of Vehar v. Cole National Group is a case where the plaintiff, Wendy Vehar, accused Cole National Group of sex discrimination claiming that as a female she was not being the same wage as a male for performing the same duties. Additionally this study will determine if the plaintiff established a valid prima facie as well as if there was a basis for equal work. Next, what factors did the appeals court base its decision and why is the other-than-sex factor that is presented by the employer insufficient to avoid a trial? Finally, what should the employer have done differently to ensure this type of situation did not occur in their business?
The petitioner’s original bond was revoked after evidence that he was intimidating the witness and after the petitioner screamed and shouted racial slurs at the magistrate judge as well as spit on his face. This behavior furthered supported that Charles Sell was suffering from a delusional disorder.The district court concluded that the decision to involuntarily medicate Charles Sell to restore his health and competence is constitutional. The courts also concluded that the drugs administered must not have any negative effects. They also stated that drugs used were medically appropriate for Charles Sell and it gave him the right to due process and protected his fifth and sixth amendment right to a fair trial. The majority of people found that
In this case questioning workplace harassment in terms of sexual discrimination and its prevalence to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Joseph Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services distinguishes whether or not discrimination can occur within the same sex.
SNC delivered a clear and accurate five paragraph order minimizing the use of filler words and briefing the order with a confident and authoritative tone. SNC rendered particular attention to the Size and Activity portions of the Enemy Situation. SNC’s initial plan was unclear and included phrases such as “most likely”. SNC overcame the deficiencies of his initial plan and issued specific tasks to subordinates. SNC effectively lead from the front and developed creative solutions to problems as points of friction arose. SNC ensured security was vigilant throughout the execution of the problem. SNC lacked the ability to forecast potential problems with his plan and at one point stated “this candidate didn’t see that coming”. Realizing
When it comes to making claims it is hard unless there is enough information that can prove that the complainant was actually discriminated against because they were a man or woman. Mary can bring a claim for gender discrimination against her company because she has determined that because she is a woman that she makes thousands of dollars less than her male counterparts. There has been no reason given to why Mary makes that much less than her male counterparts. The issue with this scenario is that we don’t know if the organization that Mary works for uses the seniority, merit, or other pay systems. Most of the male counterparts could have received merit pay based off of their performance and evaluations throughout the last five years. We don’t
If Mr. Bucket, the attorney, used duty-based ethics he would not bride the judge in order to win the case for his client. Under the religious ethical standard he would not pay the judge off because even though the act may seem fair the act is not justifiable and is immoral. This would be just like Robin Hood who is still seen as a theif eventhough he was redistrubution the wealth to those who needed it more. Furthermore, Bucket would also say no because of kantian ethics. To use this form of ethics one must ask, if everyone bribed the judge to win their case how would it affect our justice system? There would be no true value of justice just like if everyone cheated on their test their would be no value in a degree. Lastly, under the principle of rights Bucket would not bribe the judge because bribes are contrary to the natural desire for justice. It would impend on the judges decision to make an ethical decision and affect other attorneys who come into contact with this judge
A proposed class action against Dick’s Sporting Goods, Inc. has been filed in California federal court. Accusations that the sporting goods retailer violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) allege that the company sent text messages to consumers after they had opted out of the subscription based alert advertising program. Plaintiff, Phillip Ngiehm, states that he originally agreed to participate in the marketing program, but that he opted out in December 2015 by texting the word “stop” as instructed. According to the terms of the program, this would result in a halt of messages from the program to the subscriber – effectively removing him from the subscriber list.
A Lone Pine order is basically a controlled burn, or it accomplishes the same objective at least. In theory, it is a “fire” used to prevent the growth or blaze of meritless litigation. Don’t want a nasty, complex lawsuit to grow or blaze out of control? Hit it with a Lone Pine order early on in hopes of killing that volatile vegetation. Is it fair? It depends on which side of the courtroom you’re sitting on. Because it acts essentially as an early motion for summary judgment, generally speaking, plaintiff’s attorneys hate them, defense lawyers love them. Does it work? A recent opinion from the Colorado Supreme Court suggests a similar response is required. It depends on which courtroom you’re sitting in - federal or state (and if state, which one).
On 10/18/2017, the granulation completed a full clean (#3) for Sweco TG1085 after a 10 batches campaign for HYPAM (4 batches of 25 mg GMID 50017724 and 4 batches of 50 mg GMID 50017725) occurred on 10/10/2017 – 10/17/2017 in TG9 (big Z-bar). However, while the authorized associate of the granulation equipment clean room was putting the parts away into the appropriate storage location; he discovered that the required cleaning green card was missing for the 14 mesh Sweco screen (TG1085), which he later found inside the process room. However, as he was matching the screen info from the green card, he discovered that the Sweco screen used is dedicated to BUDESONIDE.
Lesson 1: Do not hesitate to bring in the experts to make sure your network is configured properly. I think it was a right lesson Halamka had learnt. Because the primary reason for the collapse was they did not treat IT as an important part of the company, which made the system out of dated, under budget and staff. So gaining support from expert was a right lesson for Halamka.