1. What is the most “jealously” protected kind of speech, according to the court in this case? (3 points)…
The court ruled against Fox Associates. Was the court correct? Do you think Fox should have done its own background check? Why or Why not?…
First, the lower court’s factual determinations are based on an erroneous legal standard, in assuming that ETS has an implied duty to investigate Dalton’s evidence. The majority rejected that standard as well. The dissent concluded that the lower court’s decision, at minimum, should be a reversal and remittal for new findings based on the proper legal standard. Second, as a matter of law, ETS fulfilled its contractual obligation. Both the majority and dissent agree a covenant of good faith exists. The differences appear to be a result of facts, not the law. The specific factual dispute is whether ETS adequately considered Dalton’s evidence regarding his presence in the room on the test day. The dissent concluded that each ETS Board of member gave a reason why he or she found Dalton’s submission was irrelevant. Therefore, a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing could only be established if the reason the Board members gave to deem irrelevant Dalton’s submissions was arbitrary, capricious or irrational. Each Board member testified that the evidence did not explain the crucial doubt, the disparate handwriting. The reason to deem irrelevant Dalton’s evidence of presence was not irrational, arbitrary or capricious, and it cannot form the basis of a breach of the implied covenant of good faith. The majority is simply substituting its own judgment for that of…
Sheppard v. Maxwell, was a United States Supreme Court case that examined the rights of freedom of the press as outlined in the 1st Amendment when weighed against a defendant's right to a fair trial as required by the 6th Amendment. In particular, the court sought to determine whether or not the defendant was denied fair trial for the second-degree murder of his wife, of which he was convicted, because of the trial judge's failure to protect Sheppard sufficiently from the massive, pervasive, and prejudicial publicity that attended his prosecution.…
In 1963 Clarence Earl Gideon presented himself in front of the Supreme Court. Gideon had been indicted for breaking and entering; after defending himself in his preliminary trial he was sentenced to five years in prison. During his time in jail, Gideon did some research on law and wrote an appeal to the Supreme Court. Gideon’s request of representation was on behalf of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court decided to put the case on trial; it related back to the Betts v. Brady case of 1942. Unlike Betts v. Brady’s 6-3 ruling in which Betts had lost, Gideon won the case with an astounding 9-0 majority. The main issue of the case centers on proper representation of the defendant. In order for the reader to fully understand the scope of the case, he or she needs to consider Betts v. Brady.…
1) What is the most “jealousy” protected kind of speech, according to the court in this case? (3 points)…
The question in the matter now is whether or not the statistical study was able to prove that McCleskey’s sentence violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The District Court held an…
Abel Fields was then convicted under the Stolen Valor Act, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $1,000. However, Fields appealed his decision arguing that the act was unconstitutional because his rights to free speech has been violated. His argument is completely invalid because his lies were made intentionally so it should not be protected. Fields should still be convicted since he has never…
(Article 2) She was only guilty by association, and she didn't do any harm to…
In the groundbreaking case Gideon vs. Wainwright we are given a prime example of a Supreme Court case and its impact on federalism. Gideon was accused of felony burglary charges after an eyewitness placed him at the scene of a robbery. Although there was no evidence of him committing the crime, police arrested him and charged him with the theft based solely on an eye witness report. The sequences of events that would follow would change the way states were ordered to provide due process and create a fair and balanced trial for all felony trials.…
After doing research about the Aaron Feuerstein case, he thinks he was doing the right things even he has to…
References: O’Hare, P., Lezon, D., Ellison, D., Markley, M., Ruiz, R., & Villafranca, A. (2006). The Andrea Yates Case: Not Guilty, But Not Free. Houston Chronicle.com. Retrieved August 21, 2011 from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=9&sid=2&scrchmode=1&vinst…
If I was deciding the case, Clark v. Arizona, I would rule not guilty by reason…
Stewart, through his new appointed attorneys (paid for by a non-profit anti-death penalty organization), has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the federal district court for the District of Arizona. Among other arguments, Stewart claims that his rights were violated by Arizona because information and testimony was used against him that related to his confidential discussions with his then attorney, James Careful. The state claims that the use of the confidential communication with his attorney was proper in this case.…
Linder, Douglas O. (2005). The Trial of John Brown: A Commentary. Retrieved from http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/johnbrown/brownaccount.html. On August 6, 2012.…