Question A: Likelihood of Kimberly’s claim being successful: With the central issue in Kimberly’s circumstance of being physically and mentally impaired due to the shutters of the Bed & Breakfast house flying off and as a result‚ hitting the plaintiff (Kimberly)‚ there is a high possibility that Kimberly’s claim will succeed. As a result of Elle being aware that months after the shutters were installed‚ she noticed splinters in the wood and damage in some of the shutters but took no precautionary
Premium Tort Tort law Law
|[pic] |School of Creative Industries Art Design |[pic] | | |Media & Performing Arts | | |BTEC Extended |Assignment Title: Script 1 | |Diploma
Premium Writing Proposal Proposals
Maddox v. Montgomery United States Courts of Appeals‚ Eleventh Circuit 718 F.2d 1033 (11th Cir. 1983) Kenneth Davis CJAD 405‚ Section A Professor Alesio June 08‚ 2011 Facts: Jimmy Maddox was convicted of rape in a Georgia state court and sentenced to life imprisonment. Having unsuccessfully pursued his direct appeal and the state post-conviction remedy‚ Maddox filed a federal habeas corpus petition alleging prosecutorial suppression of exculpatory evidence in violation
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Habeas corpus United States
Meritor Sav. Bank v. Vinson‚ 477 US 57 (1986) Facts: After being terminated a female bank employee filed an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964‚ 42 U.S.C.S. §2000e et seq.‚ claiming that she had been sexually harassed by her male supervisor. The US Supreme Court ruled that if the actions of the supervisor were unwelcome‚ than the respondent had a claim for sexual harassment on the basis of a hostile work environment‚ even if the sexual acts were voluntary. Issues: (1) Whether
Premium Sexual harassment United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Procedural History: Plaintiff brought suit against defendant for fraud and breaches of warranty. Summary judgement granted in favor of defendant by the District Court. Plaintiff appealed claiming genuine issues of material facts exist. The Facts: Plaintiff bought a used car from Defendant‚ a used car dealer. Defendant offered no warranty‚ but told Plaintiff that the car had been inspected and was accident free. Plaintiff purchased a service plan through Defendant to be administered by a
Premium Automobile Law English-language films
Robinette Facts: Defendant was speeding 30 miles over the speed limit in a construction zone. A police officer stopped him‚ asked for the Defendant’s driver’s license which he produced. The officer ran a computer check which showed that the Def. didn’t have any previous violations. The officer asked the Defendant to step out of the car‚ turned on his video camera mounted on the officer’s vehicle and verbally warned the defendant for speeding‚ and then returned his license. After returning his license
Premium Law Police Supreme Court of the United States
Swan v. Talbot‚ Phelan v. Gardner‚ Marron v. Marron Case Briefs Jennifer Beverly PA205-02 Professor Byron Grim June 20‚ 2011 Case Briefs Citation: Swan v. Talbot‚ 152 Cal. 142 (Cal. 1907) Facts: George Swan‚ plaintiff‚ sold James R. Talbot‚ defendant‚ a portion of personal property. Swan was inebriated at the time the deal was prepared. The portion of the property sold to Talbot was valued at $21‚949.86. Talbot paid Swan $10‚604.32‚ this included $200 in coin that was paid to Swan
Premium Appeal
After careful review by the trial court‚ the judge awarded CNAC $94‚304.79 as well as the additional expenditures accumulated as a result of the trial. The initial decision dealt with just the two companies‚ excluding Holberg individually. Before the case was closed‚ while motions could still be placed into action‚ the plaintiff requested to modify the
Premium Law Contract Supreme Court of the United States
Case Brief 1. CASE: Caperton v. A. T. Massey Coal Co. Inc. 556 U.S. 868 (2009) 2. FACTS: A West Virginia jury issued a verdict against respondents (“Massey”) in the amount of $50 million. After the verdict‚ knowing that the West Virginia’s Supreme Court of Appeals would consider the appeal‚ Blankenship‚ the chairman‚ CEO and president of Massey contributed $3 million to help Benjamin run for office in that court in West Virginia’s 2004 judicial election. Benjamin won the election in a close
Premium Jury United States Supreme Court of the United States
James Donalds – Case Brief Practice R. v. Sparrow‚ [1990] 1 SCR 1075 Facts: Sparrow was charged under s. 61(1) of the Fisheries Act with the offence of fishing with a drift net longer than permitted by the terms of the Indian Food Fishing License. Sparrow admitted to committing the act‚ but claimed that he has the aboriginal right to fish under s. 31(1) of the Fisheries Act. Therefore‚ the Act is inconsistent with s. 35(1) of the Constitution Act‚ 1982 and is invalid. He was unsuccessful
Premium Law United Kingdom United States