WILFREDO M. CATU‚ complainant vs. ATTY. VICENTE G. RELLOSA‚ respondent A.C. No. 5738 (February 19‚ 2008) This is an administrative case filed by the complainant claiming that the respondent committed an act of impropriety as a lawyer and as public officer when he stood as counsel for the defendants despite the fact that he presided over the conciliation proceedings between the litigants as punong barangay.. Facts: Complainant Wilfredo M. Catu is a co-owner of a lot and the building erected thereon
Premium Lawyer Law
William Le Grande v. B & L Services‚ INC. π (1983) ∆ FACTS: π set his own schedule‚ and operated independent and at his own discretion. π could use ∆ dispatch service but was not required to and could pick up passengers at his own discretion. π signed a K with ∆ disclaiming any ER/EE relationship. π paid ∆ a daily fee and paid for fuel. π kept all addition money. ∆ required π to keep "trip sheets" and comply with a simple dress code‚ both mandated by local ordinance. ∆ provided
Premium The Work Judgment Control
Chaiken Case Brief Facts: Chaiken made separate but equal agreements with Strazella and Spitzer to operate a barber shop. Under the “partnership” agreement: ~ Chaiken would provide the barber chairs‚ supplies and licenses. Strazella and Spitzer provide tools of the trade. ~ Gross returns were to be divided on a percentage basis between all three men. ~ Chaiken will decide all matters of the partnership policy. ~Stated hours of work and holidays. ~Chaiken holds and distributes all receipts
Premium Employment Corporation Profit
Citation: Harvestons Securities‚ Inc. v. Narnia Investments‚ Ltd.‚ 218 S.W.3d 126 (2007) Plaintiff and Defendant: The plaintiff/appellant is Harvestons Securities‚ Inc. The defendant/appellee is Narnia Investments‚ Ltd. Facts: In year 2000‚ Narnia Investments‚ Ltd. sued Harvestons Securities‚ Inc. and several defendants in trial court of Texas. The trial court then granted a default judgment against Harvestons and in favor of Narnia that Harvestons has to pay $365‚000‚ plus attorney’s fees‚ prejudgment
Premium Civil procedure Service of process Complaint
Anne Marbury Hutchinson By: Ryan Cox Anne Marbury Hutchinson was a Puritan woman who believed she knew the New England ministers were not teaching the truth to their Puritan followers and that she knew the real word of God. She quickly grew a following of both women and men. This sparked major controversy in the new colony because she was the first woman to speak her mind in a society where women were not allowed to do so. People started to get fed up with
Premium Massachusetts Rhode Island Anne Hutchinson
In “The Petitioner’s Brief in Sweatt v. Painter‚ 1950”‚ the document explained the NAACP arguments as they were before the Supreme Court. Essentially‚ it explored three arguments that the NAACP would later employ in future cases regarding segregation. Reprinted within Waldo E. Martin Jr.’s‚ “Brown v. Board of Education: A Brief History with Documents”‚ it offers key insight into the arguments the NAACP used in the Supreme Court. The first argument relates to whether schools established for Blacks
Premium Brown v. Board of Education Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
Attending the University of Wisconsin Madison has always been an aspiration of mine. Every aspect that the university possesses fits me perfectly. Plus‚ it has earned a reputation for being one of the top colleges in the Nation for its impressive academics and scholarly community. UW-Madison has been able to accomplish this stature by including something for everybody. I am applying to UW-Madison for several reasons. Most remarkably‚ the school ranked 11th in academics amongst all of America’s
Premium Education University Learning
The Great Little Madison- Jean Fritz James Madison‚ the fourth President of the United States‚ was born on March 16‚ 1751 to Nellie Conway Madison and James Madison‚ Sr. in Orange County Virginia. He was the eldest of twelve children‚ only seven of whom survived infancy. He attended school in Virginia for part of his youth and tutored at home until the age of eighteen‚ when he enrolled at the College of New Jersey‚ later known as Princeton University. He excelled at his studies‚ graduating early
Premium James Madison Thomas Jefferson United States Constitution
Assignment I- Case Brief: McCarty v. Pheasant Run ‚ Inc. Prof Lindsey Appiah Tort Law October 28‚ 2012 Summary of Case Mrs. Dula McCarty brought suit against Pheasant Run Inc. for negligence. In 1981‚ Mrs. McCarty was attacked by a man in her hotel room‚ beaten and threatened of rape. Mrs. McCarty ultimately fought off her attacker and he fled. The attacker was never identified nor brought to justice. Although Mrs. McCarty did not sustain serious physical injuries‚ she claimed the incident
Premium Tort Law Tort law
Behihana of Tokyo‚ Inc. v. Benihana‚ Inc.‚ 906 A.2d 114 (Del. 2006) Facts: Rocky Aoki founded Benihana of Tokyo‚ Inc. (BOT)‚ and its subsidiary‚ Benihana‚ which own and operate Benihana restaurants in the United States and other countries. Aoki transferred his 100% ownership of BOT to Benihana Protective Trust in 1998 in order to avoid licensing problems stemming from his conviction on insider trading charges. Benihana‚ a Delaware corporation‚ had two classes of common stock. There were 6 million
Premium Stock Corporation Fiduciary