Ermina Dedic Legal Brief 1 Name of Case: Dow Chemical Co. v United States. Court: U.S. Supreme Court Citation: 476 U.S. 227 (1986) Parties and their roles: Dow Chemical (Plaintiffs/Petitioner) and United States (Defendants/ Respondents) Facts: Dow Chemical operates a two-thousand-acre chemical plant at Midland‚ Michigan. The facility‚ with numerous buildings‚ conduits‚ and pipes‚ are visible from the air. Dow has maintained ground security at the
Premium United States Law Appeal
resolution of the Court regarding G.R Nos. 82585‚ 82827 and 83979; wherefore‚ the petitioner’s were lump together considering these cases were same in character. In these consolidated cases‚ 3 principal issues were raised: 1) whether or not petitioners were denied due process when information for libel were filed against them although the finding of the existence of prima facie case was still under review by the Secretary of Justice and‚ subsequently‚ by the President; 2) whether or not the constitutional
Premium United States Constitution Prima facie Freedom of speech
2. Decision has to be taken in favor of Perry. In this case‚ Alice was a dual agent. When representing two principals it is likely the interest of one party was to suffer. Alice has breached her fiduciary to both Perry and David. After Perry discovered that David employed Alice he had the right to rescind. 8. In this case there are judgment for Timothy assuming that a lawyer acting reasonably would have had the opportunity to realize the revised statute of limitations period. As an agent‚ Cynthia
Premium Law Court Appeal
In 1999 the supreme court ruled on a case in the same matter as Judge Stevens. There is sum responsibility the company has to protect the environment and those that rely on the resources from this environment. A company that produces an item should in good faith ensure that its customers understand
Premium Legal terms Joint and several liability United States Environmental Protection Agency
requested Keays visit with the organizations occupational medicine specialist to further diagnose his condition. Keays refused to abide with Hondas request and sought legal guidance at which point Honda terminated his employment. The Keays versus Honda case was presented in court three times. The first of which ended in Keays favor with the trial judge ordering Honda to pay Keays damages based on a
Premium Automobile Civil procedure Law
Michael was said to have reached for officer Darren Wilson’s firearm. The case went on for two months and 27 days before the jury came to the decision of Darren Wilson not guilty. This opposition created many riots in Ferguson‚ which were not peaceful‚ “Buildings were set on fire‚ and looting was reported in several businesses”(NYT). This shows us that the people of Ferguson disagree with the decision of the jury. The Ferguson case got so much attention because the community was predominantly black and
Premium Protest Plessy v. Ferguson Demonstration
All of the Smart Briefs I have been choosing I realized have focused on subjects similar to that of our assignments in this class and my choice for this Smart Brief is no different. The Smart Brief I chose is titled “The Secret to Resume Success” and was written by Romy Newman‚ President and Co-Founder of Fairygodboss‚ on huffpost.com. Now all of us have applied for jobs in the past‚ are currently applying for jobs‚ and or will in the future. In my 22 years of life I have applied for several jobs
Premium Employment Management Recruitment
The reason I chose this case was due to the fact it was a popular case throughout my childhood and because my cousin was a quadriplegic and had a form of cerebral palsy where she was limited to being taken care of by medical and hospital staff I was just a small child at this time my family would have regular visits with her One summer she got extremely sick and went into a coma my aunt then had to make the decision to keep her on life support or to let her go So this case is very relevant to what
Premium Family Crime Police
ROBERT C. BROWNING V. ARTHUR JOHNSON Project Type: Re writing of judgement Submitted to: Prof . Surabhi Rajapal Faculty‚ Contract law Submitted by: Shubhank Singh Semester II Year I Roll no. 2015- 110 NALSAR University of Law‚ Hyderabad FACTS OF THE CASE: Browning and Johnson went into an agreement of offer whereby Browning was to offer his practice and hardware to Johnson. Both sides and their lawyers trusted the agreement made to be totally legitimate and enforceable. Prior to the agreement’s
Premium Contract Consideration
Tyler Womer Sports Law IRAC #1 9/9/14 Case 1: Moose v. MIT Issues: (1) Whether or not the defendants (MIT‚ Coach Taylor‚ & Coach Slovenski) were negligent with respect to their coaching techniques and the equipment they furnished to Garret Moose at the time he was injured. (2) Whether or not the harm was foreseeable. (3) Whether or not MIT was liable for the injured athlete. Rule: The jury found that each defendant‚ as well as the plaintiff‚ was negligent and that the defendants’ negligence
Premium Tort Tort law Law