“Move It” The plaintiffs’ main argument in the case centered on that of the main plaintiff‚ Mary Watson‚ a single woman. Ms. Watson claimed when she visited one of the Move It’s outlet stores‚ she observed several items that were marked with tags containing two prices; a “Suggested Retail Price” and
Premium Law Lawyer United States
Chavez vs. Romulo G.R. No. 157036‚ June 9‚ 2004A mere license is always revocable FACTS: This case is about the ban on the carrying of firearms outside of residence in order to deter the rising crime rates. Petitioner questions the ban as a violation of his right to property ISSUE: Whether or not the revocation of permit to carry firearms is unconstitutional and Whether or not the right to carry firearms is a vested property right HELD: Petitioner cannot find solace to the above-quoted
Premium Law United States Constitution Property law
Press Release Be-Brief: Online Men’s Underwear and Swimwear Store Be-Brief is a leading online men’s underwear and swimwear store. The store has been an integral part of men’s lives since 2006 and has been providing them with their basic need of intimate wear. Be-Brief has built a reputation on authentic products‚ remarkable customer support‚ fast shipping and easy search options. Be-Brief has a compilation of 42 popular brands that are unique in their own sense and target a variety of personalities
Premium Retailing Marketing Sales
The Pelican Brief starts with the assassination of two different Supreme Court Justices. Liberal Justice Rosenberg is killed at home‚ while the conservative Justice Jenson is killed inside an explicit theater. The circumstances surrounding their deaths and the deaths themselves shock politically split nation. Darby Shaw‚ a law student‚ decides to investigate the two justices’ records and pending cases. She writes a report guessing Victor Mattiece‚ an oil tycoon wanting to drill for oil on Louisiana
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Law United States
America. With that being said‚ a group of people is exempt from being placed on death row due to the Atkins v. Virginia case; the mentally disabled. Bobby James Moore was convicted of capital murder in 1980. He shot a seventy-year-old store clerk in Houston‚ Texas and his sentence‚ affirmed on appeal‚ was execution. In 2001‚ after a court granted habeas‚ Moore argue that the Atkins v. Virginia case should apply to him. The court agreed he should not be executed‚ however‚ the Court of Criminal Appeals
Premium Capital punishment Capital punishment in the United States Crime
Marbury vs. Madison What was the case: Marbury was a soon-to-be appointed justice of the peace when Adam’s presidency came to an end‚ resulting in his successor‚ Thomas Jefferson denying credibility of the appointments because they were not completed during the time of Adam’s presidency. Jefferson’s Secretary of State‚ James Madison‚ was asked to allow the commissions. Decision: The Supreme Court denied Marbury’s writ of mandamus and he was denied the commissions. Reasoning: Congress cannot expand
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution Marbury v. Madison
This is evident in the case of Virginia Rappe‚ a popular silent film actress who died in the days following a party with the biggest star at the time‚ Roscoe “Fatty” Arbuckle. The case was based on the assumption that her death‚ caused by a ruptured bladder‚ was due to being raped by Arbuckle. This case was filled with many conflicting testimonies along with the influence of the press making the persecution of Arbuckle impossible. The police investigation of this case was met with many difficulties
Premium Family Pregnancy Mother
Ermina Dedic Legal Brief 1 Name of Case: Dow Chemical Co. v United States. Court: U.S. Supreme Court Citation: 476 U.S. 227 (1986) Parties and their roles: Dow Chemical (Plaintiffs/Petitioner) and United States (Defendants/ Respondents) Facts: Dow Chemical operates a two-thousand-acre chemical plant at Midland‚ Michigan. The facility‚ with numerous buildings‚ conduits‚ and pipes‚ are visible from the air. Dow has maintained ground security at the
Premium United States Law Appeal
resolution of the Court regarding G.R Nos. 82585‚ 82827 and 83979; wherefore‚ the petitioner’s were lump together considering these cases were same in character. In these consolidated cases‚ 3 principal issues were raised: 1) whether or not petitioners were denied due process when information for libel were filed against them although the finding of the existence of prima facie case was still under review by the Secretary of Justice and‚ subsequently‚ by the President; 2) whether or not the constitutional
Premium United States Constitution Prima facie Freedom of speech
2. Decision has to be taken in favor of Perry. In this case‚ Alice was a dual agent. When representing two principals it is likely the interest of one party was to suffer. Alice has breached her fiduciary to both Perry and David. After Perry discovered that David employed Alice he had the right to rescind. 8. In this case there are judgment for Timothy assuming that a lawyer acting reasonably would have had the opportunity to realize the revised statute of limitations period. As an agent‚ Cynthia
Premium Law Court Appeal