was arguing with management in front of other was insubordination. 4. Research the case. How did the court rule? Why did they rule in this manner? The wrongful termination claim‚ that claim fails to make out a prima facie case in that Canady failed to establish the fourth prong (i.e. that there are facts that permit an inference of discrimination). Alternatively‚ even if Canady made out a prima facie case‚ he failed to present sufficient evidence of
Premium Racism Logic Prima facie
Helvering v. Gregory Summary Issue Commissioner Helvering of the Internal Revenue‚ the plaintiff‚ petitioned the United States Court of Appeals to review the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals to remove the tax deficiency associated with a transaction affecting the income taxes of the defendant‚ Evelyn Gregory. Facts The Taxpayer‚ Evelyn Gregory‚ owned all the shares in United Mortgage Company. United Mortgage owned shares in Monitor Securities Corporation. The taxpayer created Averill
Premium Tax Taxation in the United States Taxation
Prince v. Cariou Brief A. Statement of the Case Plaintiff Patrick Cariou sought summary judgement on the issue of liability of copyright infringement. Defendants Richard Prince‚ Gagosian Gallter‚ Inc.‚ and Lawurence Gagosian sought a determination that their use of Plaintiff’s copyrighted photographs was a “fair use” under the relevant section of the Copyright Act‚ 17 U.S.C. §§ 107 (1)-(4)‚ and that the Plaintiff’s claim for conspiracy to violate his rights under the Copyright Act
Premium United States Law Appeal
Cassie versus Kelsang Cassie: "I was also told directly that...our normal ’2015 Summer Camp’ and normal ’2016 winter camp’ will be impossible to arrange this year...TNSA began to block the activities of the program." Kelsang: " I told her‚ Kalachakra Initiation and Tibetan New Year coincide with the said camps. Players may want to take parts the events and spend time with their families. I didn’t block them from playing. Evidence is‚ their first ever match was played as an exhibition match during
Premium Tibet
Ben Lehman Comm 492 IRAC Exercise Paper (Snyder v. Phelps) Step I In this case‚ the plaintiff is Albert Snyder. He is the father of a recently killed Marine‚ Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder. The defendant is Fred W. Phelps Sr. He is a pastor and leader of the Westboro Baptist Church based in Topeka‚ KS. The church has been known to express its beliefs that "God hates America" through protests and demonstrations at military funerals across the country. In their history they have been at close
Premium United States Supreme Court of the United States Appeal
Amanda Grabowski American Government Essay #1 Supreme Court Case Riley V. California Facts of the Case The facts of the case stated that on August 2‚ 2009‚ Riley‚ who belonged to the one of the gangs of San Diego‚ California‚ and others shot at a rival gang member while driving past them. The shooters got into Riley’s car and drove away. Then‚ twenty days later on August 22‚ 2009‚ the police pulled Riley over driving a different car because of his expired license registration tags. They found
Premium
The respondent then petitioned for discretionary review by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. This court then reversed the decision finding Johnson’s flag burning to be “symbolic speech” protected by the First Amendment. Certiorari was granted. The case went to the Supreme Court. Statement of Facts The respondent‚ Johnson‚ participated in a political demonstration outside the republican national convention in Dallas in 1984. Approximately100 protestors demonstrated against the Reagan Administration
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States United States Constitution
would be material. When determining whether a fact is “material” or not under the rule‚ teams should use common sense. Ask whether the creation of the fact significantly helps either side’s case. If the answer is “yes‚” the fact is material. If a team creates a material fact in the process of their case‚ that is best exposed and attacked through impeachment and closing arguments‚ and should be dealt with in the course of the trial. A team that deals with creation of material facts in this fashion
Premium Jury Evidence law Critical thinking
Michael DePalma Law and Legal Systems Mr. Payne 4/6/16 Case Brief Miller V Alabama Miller v. Alabama 567 U.S (2012) Judicial History: Miller signed a statement in which he stated that he had stolen Cannon’s money and driver’s license after a fight but he didn’t not set his trailer on fire. A jury trial found Miller guilty of capital murder in the course of arson and gave him the mandatory sentence of life without parole. Miller’s lawyers moved for a new trial and the Circuit Court’s denial of the
Premium Crime Capital punishment Murder
Gregg v. Georgia My Legal Brief of the Case Facts: Gregg argues that capital punishment is cruel and unusual‚ so it violates his constitutional rights protected under the Eighth Amendment. In 1972 the U.S‚ Supreme Court ruled in Furman v. Georgia‚ that the death penalty couldn’t be used in an arbitrary manner‚ in any state. Issues: Gregg‚ who was sentenced to death‚ argues that society has evolved to a point‚ where capital punishment should no longer be viewed as an acceptable form of
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Capital punishment United States