Facts: Between 1985 and 1990 Beth Ann Faragher worked part time and during the summers as an ocean lifeguard for the Marine Safety Section of the Parks and Recreation Department of the City of Boca Raton‚ Florida. During this time‚ Faragher’s immediate supervisors were Bill Terry‚ David Silverman‚ and Robert Gordan. Two years after resigning as a lifeguard in 1990‚ Beth Ann Faragher brought an action against the City of Boca Raton‚ Terry and Silverman alleging the supervisors had created a sexually
Premium United States Postal Service United States Marine Corps
In 1968‚ Fortnightly Corp. v. United Artists Television‚ Inc.‚ 392 U. S. 390‚ the Court determined that a CATV provider was more like a viewer than a broadcaster‚ because its system “no more than enhances the viewer’s capacity to receive the broadcaster’s sig¬nals by providing a well-located antenna with an efficient connec¬tion to the viewer’s television set.” Therefore‚ the Supreme Court held that a CATV provider does not violate the exclusive right of the copyright holder and hence did not perform
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Law United States
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA D’Arcy v Myriad Genetics Inc [2014] FCAFC 115 Citation: D’Arcy v Myriad Genetics Inc [2014] FCAFC 115 Appeal from: Cancer Voices Australia v Myriad Inc [2013] FCA 65 Parties: YVONNE D’ARCY v MYRIAD GENETICS INC and GENETIC TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED File number: NSD 359 of 2013 Judges: ALLSOP CJ‚ DOWSETT‚ KENNY‚ BENNETT & MIDDLETON JJ Date of judgment: 5 September 2014 Catchwords: PATENTS – Patent including claims for isolated nucleic
Premium Jury Supreme Court of the United States United States
LAW 150 Mims v. Starbucks Corp. Fact: * Kevin Keevican‚ Kathleen Mims‚ and other former managers filed a suit against Starbucks seeking unpaid overtime and other amounts. * In Starbucks Corp. Stores the manager’s responsibilities include supervising and motivating six to thirty employees including supervisors and assistant managers‚ overseeing customer service and processes employee records‚ payrolls‚ and inventory counts. * He or she also develops strategies to increase revenues
Premium Management Employment
The case about misappropriation of a trade secret that I researched is Best Buy Co. v. TechForward Inc. What happened was that Los Angeles-based TechForward sued Best Buy for misappropriating an original TechForward trade secret for the Best Buy “Guaranteed Buyback Program” (Star Tribune). The issue with the lawsuit involves what TechForward’s business does for its consumers. What they do (a much smaller business than Best Buy Co.) is calculate the buyback value of various consumer products such
Premium
Case Brief Santa Fe Independent SD v. Jane Doe Citation: Santa Fe Independent School District V. Doe‚ 530 U.S. 290 (2000) Facts: In Santa Fe‚ Texas‚ students were elected by their classmates to give pre-game prayers at high school football games over the loud speaker that were mainly Christian. A Catholic and a Mormon family felt this was a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the Constitution. The school district has always done pre-game invocations before each game
Premium Religion Supreme Court of the United States First Amendment to the United States Constitution
K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra. Facts: K. M. Nanavati was the second in Indian Naval Ship when this case was brought up. He was charged with the offence of murder of Prem Bhagwandas Ahuja‚ a businessman of Bombay. The High Court ordered Nanavati imprisonment under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. This case is of appeal which arises after the life imprisonment judgement of the Bombay High Court. The appellant’s wife was found to have illicit relations with the deceased respondant‚
Premium Evidence Criminal law Mumbai
New Jersey v. T.L.O.‚ (1985) is the case that impacted me the most. It is a decision by the US Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of a search of a public high school student after she was caught smoking. A search of her purse revealed drug paraphernalia‚ marijuana‚ and documentation of drug sales. She was charged as a juvenile for the drugs and paraphernalia found in the search. She went against the search‚ claiming it violated her 4th Amendment right against unreasonable searches. The
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution United States
Sumerel v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (pp. 394-396) The Parties: The Parties in this case are Bob and Sallie Sumerel‚ Steven and Ann Berzin‚ Dane and Kerry Dicke‚ and Bart Kaufman and Good Year Tire & Rubber Company. Bob and Sallie Sumerel‚ Steven and Ann Berzin‚ Dane and Kerry Dicke‚ and Bart Kaufman are all the plaintiffs and appellants since they are suing and also appealing the decision. The Good Year Tire & Rubber Company is the defendant and the appellees since they are being sued and
Premium Appeal Lawsuit Court
The same issue was again before the court in 1945 in McClintic v. Dunbar Land Co. The case involved six notes that were secured by a vendors’ lien. The notes were payable on a sequential‚ consecutive basis with the first becoming payable on November 26‚ 1920 and the last on November 26‚ 1925. The plaintiffs filed the action for non-payment of the notes in 1943. The defendants contended that W. Va. Code § 55-2-5 barred action on the first three notes because more than 20 years had passed. The
Premium