Nixon struggled to protect the tapes in the summer and fall of 1973. The Senate committee and Archibald Cox were determined to get the tapes. When Cox would not stop demanding for the tapes, Nixon ordered that he be fired. The Justice Department officials resigned in protest, which took place on October 20, 1973. This was called the Saturday Night Massacre.
Ms. Tolstedt was in charge of over 94,000 employees in the Community Banking division during the five years of fraudulent activity. Ms. Tolstedt decided to retire in July, 2016 when the investigation was moving toward finality. Wells Fargo allowed Ms. Tolstedt to retire and take with her around $125 million in stock options while around 5300 of her former employees are getting fired for their part of the fraudulent activities. The author feels Wells Fargo did an injustice to society and Ms. Tolstedt’s former employees by allowing her to retire and take all of her stock options with her, since she should have been
United States. “It is plain that these requirements are imposed in order to govern the details of defendants’ management of their local business.” Hughes is talking about how the requirements are imposed to govern manage their business. “Their wages have no direct relation to interstate commerce.” Huges is saying people who are working wages that don’t have any relations to interstate commerce. Document G is from a radio broadcast by John L. Lewis on December 13, 1936. “The strikes which have broken out… especially in the automobile industry, are due to such “employee trouble”.” In this sentence Lewis is blaming the strikes on employee trouble.
He later pleaded guilty to the burglary, the court revoked his probation and sentenced him to ten years in prison. In this case, I’m not sure why they revoked his probation, but there must be a reason. Mempa like Scarpelli filed for a habeas corpus, for the fact that his probation was revoked and that his right to counsel was denied and the writ was denied. And the question in this case is “does the absence of a counsel during a post-trial proceeding for revocation of probation or imposition of deferred sentencing violate the sixth amendment as applied to the states by the fourteenth amendment?” I say yes, because under the sixth amendment he has the right to counsel, and denying that is violating our rights. Also, the counsel helps the defendant in asserting his rights, such as the right to appeal, at the deferred
On July 29th, 2011, Bobby Dean Nickel was fired from his job at a Staples in Los Angeles, CA. The events leading up to that fateful day in his life have been documented in the court case Nickel vs. Staples Inc. In 2008 Staples Contract and Staples Inc. acquired Corporate Express, the company Mr. Nickel had worked for since August 2002. Corporate Express paid their employees more than Staples did, so after Staples bought Corporate Express, Mr. Nickel’s felt like his managers had it out for the older higher paid employees (him being one of them).
During the trial cases in the months of march and April, the detectives and the court were able to see the revealing cover-up story of president Nixon. On March 23, burglar James McCord told the district judge that he was pressured into silence. As things began to get even more interesting, an F.B.I director Patrick Gray resigned after he admitted to destroying the watergate scandal evidence for protection of Richard Nixon. This would cause a chain reaction which would lead to more people resigning and revealing information that each individual had a role in the watergate scandal and how they tried to cover Mr. Nixon tracks (Historyplace.com, 2009). Just as the year was ending President Richard Nixon found himself in between a rock and hard place.
Shortly after the success of Born to Run, Appel offered to renegotiate contracts with Bruce by presenting a tempting offer: giving half of Laurel Canyon stock. As Bruce was considering this, Landau brought to light that the contract Bruce originally signed with Appel-owned Laurel Canyon records had some clauses Bruce did not know about. Landau brought to light that these clauses were “Laurel Canyon could make any changes to Bruce’s work that it wanted without his permission. In other words: Bruce didn’t own his music” (Springsteen Lore). As tensions were already heightened, Bruce was furious and notified Appel that he wants the old contracts
I understand that although the companies could prove in court that they suffered substantial losses in sales and revenues from the news program, what is going to determinate the conclusion in this case is whether the employees’ disparaging statements to the TV news show are protected as concerted activity under the National Labor Relations Act or not. Moreover, the employees proved that they tried to resolve the issue with the company and that the company instead, promoted to "do whatever it takes" including lying to customer, in order to meet with their expectations. This evidence it would have been very damaging to the company
What about our justice system, which operates on the basis that if you committed a crime 5 years ago you are still guilty of it today because it was you, that did it. What about our relationships with close friends and family members, will they be gone the next day because we have become a different person. And what about our memories, how do we remember things we did 5 or 10 years ago, if we don’t have an enduring
Sany has been luring many of their staffs and one of the employees they lured was John Lanning who was the key engineer behind the crawler cranes manufacturer. Sany targeted Manitowoc's employee John Lanning due to his knowledge of the technology and because of this poaching incident, it has led to following patent and trade secret infringement case between Sany and Manitowoc. For a company like Sany, which has spent a large amount of money on R&D with the intention to be a technological leader in its industry was deeply affected by it. Sany wants to show its competitors that not all Chinese companies are using imitation strategy instead it wants to show that Chinese company is capable to be innovative through investment on R&D. However, due to the ongoing violation of intellectual property rights, it has led to negative publicity with buyers of heavy equipment and other manufacturers.