US vs. FOWLER G.R. No. L-49631 J. Torres FACTS: This is an appeal to the Supreme Court by the appellant‚ the United States‚ to review the decision made by the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Manila. The two defendants and appellees‚ Fowler et al‚ have been accused of the theft of sixteen (16) bottles of champagne of the value of $20 on 12 August 1901 while on board the transport Lawton. Lawton was then navigating the high seas. The said champagne bottles are part of the cargo and are owned by Julian
Free United States Philippines Supreme Court of the United States
topic our research paper will be addressing is corporate ethics and social responsibility. In a more specific sense our group will research whether or not Mountain Equipment Co-Operatives actions are deemed to be ethical and socially responsible. Research Question The research question considered: Is the Mountain Equipment Co-Operatives (MEC) track record or practices of corporate governance as a company in areas involving ethics and values including things such as human rights‚ charitable contributions
Premium Business ethics Corporate social responsibility Social responsibility
Bill of Rights: Tinker Case Review What is the Tinker Standard and how does it affect schools today? The Tinker Standard describes the right of a student has to exercise freedom of speech through symbolic gestures. It was first conceived when students Mary Beth Tinker and John Tinker began wearing black armbands with the “peace” symbol as a form of passive protest against the war in Vietnam‚ a very controversial topic at the time. When the staff of the school they attended suspended them for
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
In 2001‚ James M. Kilts‚ then newly appointed as chief executive officer of Gillette Co.‚ replaced two-thirds of the company’s senior management team and trimmed 3‚700 jobs‚ more than 10% of the company’s work force. Employees of the century-old company thought they had seen the shake-up of all shake-ups. Just wait until they see what Procter & Gamble Co. could have in store. In announcing the $52.4 billion takeover of Gillette‚ P&G’s CEO‚ A.G. Lafley‚ said he planned to "learn a lot from the people
Premium Procter & Gamble Chief executive officer
CASE LAW Review Problems 3 and 4 (pp. 221‚ 223) Problem 3 p221 I. INTRODUCTION The principle law that this question is concerned with is the doctrine of nuisance. In particular it focuses on private nuisance. This doctrine with regards to private nuisance is intended to prevent annoyance and disruptive conduct of unreasonable interference with the rights of private landowners. II. ISSUE The issue in this case is whether Elliot’s billboards interfering with sunlight making
Free Law Property
Law of contract BALFOUR vs. BALFOUR [1919] 2K.B. 571 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 2. LIST OF CASES 3. FACTS OF THE CASE 4. ISSUES INVOLVED
Premium Contract
Case Brief: Zuckerman v. Antenucci Sophia Haberman LAW/531 December 01‚ 2010 Dr. Maurice Rosano Case Study: Zuckerman v. Antenucci Partnership liability tort can take place when a partner or all partners acting on partnership business causes injury to a third person. Cause of this tort could be a negligent act‚ a breach of trust‚ breach of fiduciary duty‚ defamation‚ fraud‚ or another intentional tort (Cheeseman‚ 2010‚ p. 538). Under the Uniform Partnership Act‚ partners are jointly
Premium Partnership Tort law Tort
Writing a review: ‘What did the fox say?’ ‘What did the fox say?’ is the new music video that has gone viral across the internet. Now stated to be Norway’s ‘song of the summer’ it is an infectious tune that has had over 100 million views on YouTube‚ and rising. The song‚ written by comedy due Ylvis (Norwegian brothers)‚ has had a huge hit on the media‚ topping charts and mesmerizing crowds. It is sure that the two Norwegian have made slight profit of it. The musical hit has left the public question
Free Mass media Advertising Satire
Jenny vs. Angie and Richard Part A: 1. Introduction to the case Following notations are used for simplicity of explanation: Hereafter‚ Jenny will be referred to as the Plaintiff; Angie to be referred to as defendant 1; Richard to be referred to as defendant 2. The plaintiff here received some money as a result of a golden-handshake after deciding to retire. The total sum of which is $500‚ 000‚ which she intends to invest in real-estate. Upon being approached by defendant 1 with a proposal of "Sure-thing
Premium Law Jury Pleading
Co-sleeping is a practice used by as many as 40% of parents‚ in which they have the baby sleep either in the bed with them at night or in a connected crib. There have been proven to be many benefits of co-sleeping which include increased bonding‚ increased breastfeeding‚ and faster reaction times to the babies cries at night. Parents number 1 fears or reason why they think they shouldn’t co-sleep is the fear that at some time during the night their child might accidentally be suffocated by themselves
Premium Sleep Sleep deprivation Sleep disorder