The People of the State of New York V. Donald L. McCray Nature of the Case: Appeal upon a verdict convicting defendant of the crimes of assault on a police officer and criminal use of a firearm in the 2nd degree. Concise Rule of Law: Mental Hygiene Law § 9.41 which permits persons who appear to be mentally ill and acting in a manner that threatens safety of self or others to be taken into custody. The Penal Law § 120.08 imposes strict liability with respect to the serious injury aspect
Premium Crime Law Mental disorder
Shelby County v. Holder 570 U.S. __ (2013) was a United States Supreme Court case concerning Section 5 and Section 4 of The Voting Rights Act of 1965. Section 5 forbids any state or district‚ that is an eligible voter discrimination area‚ from making any changes to their election process without federal permission. Section 4 labels a state or district as eligible if said state or district had a literacy test or any other unfair device in place as of November 1‚ 1964. Section 4 also clarifies how
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Elections United States
religion‚ color‚ sex or national origin (Dessler‚ 2016). This is the first law that needs to be considered when looking at hiring an employee. After this‚ employers need to make sure they are following the guidelines and example of the Griggs v. Duke Power Company case (Dessler‚ 2016). This law is to ensure that when in the hiring process‚ the requirements of the candidates applying
Premium Employment Management Human resource management
In our history as a Nation‚ we have had some conflicts that have arisen when this occurs and it can be difficult to define what it means to have religious freedom. It should not come as a surprise to us that this may be a conflict in our future. Religion is an asset in our human lives that has directed us toward morality from the beginning of humanity as religions have grown in diversity. There is no category to which it belongs; therefore‚ it is difficult to face this problem head on when there
Premium Religion First Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution
Supreme Court Case Name & Date: Dred Scott v. Sandford ‚ 1857 | Constitutional Amendment or Article related to this issue: Articles III and IV| Democratic Ideals: Equality‚ Democracy‚ Liberty‚ Justice‚ Protection‚ Rights‚ Opportunity‚ Unity‚ Tranquility‚ Well-beingWhich of the Democratic ideals (above) are related to this issue: rights‚ equality‚ justice‚ opportunity.| OPPOSING SIDES IN THE ARGUMENT| Using the OYEZ.org web site‚ you can find the PETITIONER & RESPONDENT by clicking on the hypertext
Premium United States Supreme Court of the United States American Civil War
HomeFed Bank (1991) Cal.App.3d.767). In this case‚ a beneficiary and its counsel in a non-judicial foreclosure knew of important facts concerning a property to be sold at the courthouse steps but did not disclose those facts to the bidders at the sale. The missing disclosures were significant in determining
Premium Ethics Management Marketing
What was important in the ruling of Hobson v. Hansen (1967)? What did this change for future creation of psychological assessments and testing. In Hobson v. Hansen‚ the United States Supreme Court is important because the ruling was not fair; this case questions the ability of grouping. . This case demonstrated the un appropriateness to utilize tests on African American in where were developed with the use of Caucasian participants. The case demonstrated culturally biased testing. Due to the
Premium Psychology Psychometrics Educational psychology
Page 1 Case Name: Saelman v. Hill Between Jacques Saelman and William Wuerch‚ plaintiffs‚ and Dennis Wayne Hill and Sylvia Ann Hill‚ defendants [2004] O.J. No. 2122 [2004] O.T.C. 440 20 R.P.R. (4th) 118 2004 CanLII 9176 131 A.C.W.S. (3d) 367 Court File No. 13526/00 Ontario Superior Court of Justice Kingston‚ Ontario Hackland J. Heard: April 5-8 and 13-16‚ 2004. Judgment: May 20‚ 2004. (47 paras.) Damages -- For torts -- Affecting property -- Real property -- Nuisance -- Inconvenience -Psychological
Premium Tort Law Pleading
Adarand v. Pena 1. What constitutional issue is raised in the Adarand litigation? The issue is an affirmative action case that make its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The court was being asked to decide whether categorizing citizens by race in order to determine the kind of treatment those individuals would receive was constitutional or not. This is not something new to be tried within the United States Supreme Court system. Attorneys for each side of the Adarand v. Pena case presented to the
Free Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution
Personally‚ I agree with the Supreme Court’s decision in the landmark case of R. v. Dyment. Particularly‚ with La Forest J. commentary it provided on the importance of privacy: “…society has come to realize that privacy is at the heart of liberty in modern state…Grounded in man’s physical and moral autonomy privacy is essential for the well being of the individual. For this reason alone‚ it is worthy of constitutional protection‚ but it also has profound significance for the public order. The restraints
Premium Law Human rights United States Constitution