In July of 2000 Curtis Williams was indicted by a grand jury in Williamson County, Texas for aggravated assault causing serious bodily injury. While under indictment, Williams traveled to Louisiana from Texas on a Greyhound bus. The bus Williams was traveling on was scheduled to make a stop at the Shreveport Greyhound Bus terminal on September 12,…
Plaintiff, for all times mentioned herein, was and is a resident of the County of Jackson, State of Missouri.…
One of the ways to toll the statute of limitations for legal malpractice actions is that the attorney(s) against whom the claim(s) is alleged serve as counsel for the plaintiff on the same subject matter within which the wrongful act or omission occurred. This would seem to require privity between plaintiff and the attorney(s). However, this is not the case when it comes to trustees who are represented in their capacity as fiduciaries.…
Facts: Police officers were in pursuit of a suspected drug dealer, and were led to an apartment complex. The officers ended up outside of a certain apartment, were the smell of marijuana emanated. The police knocked loudly, and from inside the apartment they heard movement, and the police believed that the sounds were an indication that evidence was being destroyed. The police announced their intent to enter the apartment, kicked the door down to find drugs and drug paraphernalia in plain sight, and arrested King and others. They continued to search the apartment and came across other evidence. King argued that due to the officers not having a warrant…
4)The case we read in class that I enjoyed the most was State of Connecticut v. Cardwell. I primarily liked it because it best exemplifies the difference and complexity regarding the sale of goods and the helps reflect the distinction between a “shipment” and “destination” contracts. I disagree with the trial courts judgment that Cardwell sold tickets within Connecticut and thereby violated Connecticut statute. However, I agree with the judgment of the court after the appeal. The transfer of goods occurred in Massachuestes, therefore the sale of the tickets, as defined by the code, occurred in Massachusts.…
The New York Court of Appeals decision should be upheld in regards to Riggs et al v. Palmer case because one should not be granted inheritance by murdering one’s ancestor. For this reason, the New York Court of Appeals has decided on a naturalistic approach, which has deemed Elmer Palmer guilty for murdering his grandfather, thereby prohibiting Palmer from getting anything from his grandfather’s will. This essentially means that the court argues that judges use their morals in order to determine the outcome of cases. Therefore, rejecting the idea that it is morally acceptable to murder someone in order to personally benefit from their death. As a result, there has been a heated debate between naturalists like Judge Earl who argue that Elmer…
Florida v. Bostick was a felony drug trafficking case which set precedence to the legality of random police searches of passengers aboard public buses and trains pertaining to said passenger’s fourth amendment rights. Shortly after boarding a bus departing from Miami headed for Atlanta, Terrance Bostick was approached by members of the Broward County Sheriffs department acting as part of a drug interception task force and without particularly suspicion was questioned by officers. Broward county sheriff officers advised Mr. Bostick of his right to not consent to a search of his personal belongings and then asked his permission to carry out the search. Terrance Bostick granted sheriffs officers request by consenting to the search which revealed a felonious amount…
In the case of Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, the Supreme Court made the wrong decision because a company is not a person and thus does not have the same rights as one. Hobby Lobby employs 23,000 people, all of which could receive all 20 state covered forms of birth-control. The owner of Hobby Lobby felt that certain forms terminated a life, which many doctors disagree with. Hobby Lobby claimed they were being forced to allow employees to receive these forms violated their religious rights and decided to pursue a court case against the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services, Sylvia Burwell.…
In this paper I am going to take a look at the case state of Maryland v Alonzo King. I will take a look at what accomplice liability is and criminal liability and how they are related to the case of Maryland v King. How different aspects of crime differ from one another and there direct correlation to this case.…
In 2012, a family called the Greens ran Hobby Lobby, which is a craft store. This family are Christians and have strong faith in what they believe in. Being a very religious family, that they believe that giving or promoting contraceptives, will make them seem as if they are going against their own belief (Oyez, 2013). Contraceptives are artificial methods or various techniques to prevent pregnancy due to sexual intercourse, so the Greens family refuse to provide those things to their workers. This is where the Greens family is furious to give these types of protection to their workers, so they sued.…
Obergefell v. Hodges is the Supreme Court Case that gay marriage legal in all fifty states. The case required that all states allow gay marriages and recognize gay marriages that happened in other states. It was a 5-4 decision that was based on the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th amendment. Obergefell wanted his marriage in Maryland to be recognized in Ohio, so he could collect the benefits from his partners death. Hodges is the director of the Ohio Health Department.…
Brennan states that one of the proposed majority decisions is changed into a dissent before the final ruling is announced, then the Justices will figure out the final form of the opinion. In “Separate but Equal”, a dissent never existed, the Supreme Court just skips it and goes right to writing the final form. This article shows how the Supreme Courts decisions can cause major issues and controversies among the country. “Separate but Equal” proved to be a great example of all the controversies and problems that can result from decisions made by the Supreme Court by dealing with the issue of Segregation in public…
The United States legal system gives all people the right to an attorney to help defend the prosecuted individual. The court case Buck v. Davis shows how a person’s rights could be given but in a way that would go against the one being charged for a crime. Duane Buck is an African American who was tried for being involved in a murder of his ex-girlfriend and her friend in the state of Texas. Many different types of evidence showed that Duane Buck had committed that crime and his passed issues with the legal system. Buck was able to appeal this decision of the death penalty due to the violation of his rights.…
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS ET AL. v. SEBELIUS, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL. (Supreme Court of the United States 2011) otherwise known as the healthcare law which mandates healthcare for all, when this kind of law is in place and it affects the citizens on a whole that decision must be…
Human Services in the United States recently received what many have heralded a big win for Americans nationally when The Affordable Care Act was signed into law. Politically the health care law known as Obama Care was signed into law March 23, 2010 and immediately was challenged in the courts as being unconstitutional and infringing upon the rights of citizens with the mandated requirement that all Americans purchase health insurance or face penalties for not doing so. Two years ago on June 28th 2012 the Supreme Court rendered a final decision to uphold the health care law. This decision almost instantly caused a wide range of political uproar from the right, but from a human stand…