1. The purpose of this memorandum is to outline the important aspects of the case‚ Mathews v. Eldridge‚ and write a case brief using the FIRAC method. 2. FACTS: Eldridge was first awarded benefits in June 1968. He received a questionnaire in March 1972 from the state agency charged with monitoring his medical condition. He said his condition had not improved in the questionnaire and documented treatments he received and physicians who treated him. After the agency processed his paperwork‚ they determined
Premium Medicine Health care Patient
Justin Smith Stambovsky v. Ackley (Case Brief 3) Facts The Plaintiff purchased a house that was known to be possessed by poltergeists. Stamboysky was from New York City and not familiar with local folklore. The sellers were aware that it was haunted and actually reported it through national publication‚ Reader’s Digest‚ in 1977 and the local press in 1982. Procedural History The Plaintiff‚ Stambovsky‚ sued to have the contract canceled. The trial court ruled in favor of Ackley. Issue Can the
Premium Contract Contract law Law
1. In the case of Hu v. Fang‚ 127 Ca.Rptr.2d 756 (2002)‚ when the court said the paralegal’s error was “imputed” on the attorney‚ it meant that the attorney was responsible for the acts or omissions of his paralegal. I relied on ABA Model Rule 5.3 – Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistants for formulating my answer. 2. Based on the holding in the Hu v. Fang case‚ an available sanction might be that the default would not be set aside since‚ unlike the instant case‚ the error was not caught
Premium Law Jury Appeal
the Bank or imposing heavy burdens on it.” The state of Maryland impeded the operations of the Bank by imposing a significant paper tax on all notes not chartered by the state. McCulloch‚ the cashier of the Baltimore branch of the Bank brought the case to the trial court which decided against him. The Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed this decision. ISSUE: Does Congress have the authority to instate a bank‚ and if so‚ does the state of Maryland
Premium United States United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
Search and Seizure Portfolio In his article Florida v. Harris: Turning Police Dogs into Search Warrants on a Leash‚ John Whitehead questions the intentions of both police officers and Supreme Court judges‚ who seem to be condoning and ruling in favor of unconstitutional searches of American citizens. The criteria for what qualifies as probable cause has now been left up to the judgement of an officer. With variance in why a search should be conducted‚ Americans are left in the dark when it comes
Premium Police Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
was arguing with management in front of other was insubordination. 4. Research the case. How did the court rule? Why did they rule in this manner? The wrongful termination claim‚ that claim fails to make out a prima facie case in that Canady failed to establish the fourth prong (i.e. that there are facts that permit an inference of discrimination). Alternatively‚ even if Canady made out a prima facie case‚ he failed to present sufficient evidence of
Premium Racism Logic Prima facie
Helvering v. Gregory Summary Issue Commissioner Helvering of the Internal Revenue‚ the plaintiff‚ petitioned the United States Court of Appeals to review the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals to remove the tax deficiency associated with a transaction affecting the income taxes of the defendant‚ Evelyn Gregory. Facts The Taxpayer‚ Evelyn Gregory‚ owned all the shares in United Mortgage Company. United Mortgage owned shares in Monitor Securities Corporation. The taxpayer created Averill
Premium Tax Taxation in the United States Taxation
Prince v. Cariou Brief A. Statement of the Case Plaintiff Patrick Cariou sought summary judgement on the issue of liability of copyright infringement. Defendants Richard Prince‚ Gagosian Gallter‚ Inc.‚ and Lawurence Gagosian sought a determination that their use of Plaintiff’s copyrighted photographs was a “fair use” under the relevant section of the Copyright Act‚ 17 U.S.C. §§ 107 (1)-(4)‚ and that the Plaintiff’s claim for conspiracy to violate his rights under the Copyright Act
Premium United States Law Appeal
Cassie versus Kelsang Cassie: "I was also told directly that...our normal ’2015 Summer Camp’ and normal ’2016 winter camp’ will be impossible to arrange this year...TNSA began to block the activities of the program." Kelsang: " I told her‚ Kalachakra Initiation and Tibetan New Year coincide with the said camps. Players may want to take parts the events and spend time with their families. I didn’t block them from playing. Evidence is‚ their first ever match was played as an exhibition match during
Premium Tibet
Ben Lehman Comm 492 IRAC Exercise Paper (Snyder v. Phelps) Step I In this case‚ the plaintiff is Albert Snyder. He is the father of a recently killed Marine‚ Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder. The defendant is Fred W. Phelps Sr. He is a pastor and leader of the Westboro Baptist Church based in Topeka‚ KS. The church has been known to express its beliefs that "God hates America" through protests and demonstrations at military funerals across the country. In their history they have been at close
Premium United States Supreme Court of the United States Appeal