Comm 200 Dodson In the article “ Buying Happiness: The Depressing Reality of Materialism‚ written by Peter Dobson‚ he analyses the causes of depression as well as the potential cure. Dodson makes clear what he believes to be the root of depression for people in society. Dodson’s arguments are clear throughout his article and with the statistical data used‚ it seems to be the best possible to strengthen. His article is not specific to any one group of people but actually to everyone who is
Premium Regulatory Focus Theory Happiness Depression
Vian v. Carey Case Brief: Facts: Defendant Mariah Carey is a famous‚ successful‚ and wealth entertainer. Plaintiff Joseph Vian who used to be Carey stepfather is suing her. Vian claimed to have orally agreed with Carey to market singing dolls in her likeness. History: A motion of summary was given after the U.S. District court of New York saw the case. Issue: The issue is whether the objective circumstances indicate that the parties intended to form a contract Holding: Under the law of New York
Premium Contract Contract
two court cases were being held in the supreme court about cruel and unusual punishment. Ingraham Vs. Wright (1977) and Gregg Vs. Georgia (1976). I choose to compare these because they both favored common good instead of individual rights and had a lot of similar aspects of their trials. During these Supreme Court cases Gregg Vs. Georgia showed more balance between the promoting the common good and protecting the individual rights than Ingraham Vs. Wright showed in 1977. In the court case of Ingraham
Premium Capital punishment Murder Supreme Court of the United States
James Donalds – Case Brief Practice R. v. Sparrow‚ [1990] 1 SCR 1075 Facts: Sparrow was charged under s. 61(1) of the Fisheries Act with the offence of fishing with a drift net longer than permitted by the terms of the Indian Food Fishing License. Sparrow admitted to committing the act‚ but claimed that he has the aboriginal right to fish under s. 31(1) of the Fisheries Act. Therefore‚ the Act is inconsistent with s. 35(1) of the Constitution Act‚ 1982 and is invalid. He was unsuccessful
Premium Law United Kingdom United States
People v. Rangel (2012) : Case Brief Issue: When a search warrant is issued on the grounds of proving someone to be a part of gang activity‚ is it logical to be able to search their personal items such as a phone? Facts: San Mateo police believed that supposed gang member Eric Rangel was responsible for the felony assault that took place in a local park and also that it was a gang-related crime. As a result police obtained a search warrant of Rangel’s home on the grounds of proving “gang indicia”
Premium Crime Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Law
Law Case Analysis According to the law case EEOC v. FREEMAN‚ the EEOC filed a law suit against Freeman and alleged the company’s hiring policy which includes criminal background and credit history checks‚ has a disparate impact on African-American‚ Hispanic‚ and male applicants. And the material fact of this case is whether Defendant’s hiring criteria of conducting criminal background and credit history checks is consistent with business necessity. Since the Defendant was charged by the EEOC with
Premium Law Employment United States
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
Corporation. 123 Ohio St.3d 216‚ 2009-Ohio-4231 Facts of the Case: LaNisa Allen appealed the original judgment in favor of Totes/Isotoner Corporation on the issue of whether the Ohio Fair Employment Practices Act‚ as amended by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act‚ prohibits an employer from discriminating against a female employee because of or on the basis of lactation. Relevant law associated includes whether Allen established a prima facie case of “sex discrimination on the basis of pregnancy‚” or whether
Premium Pregnancy Discrimination Prima facie
Marbury v. Madison is a court case that was decided by the United States Supreme Court in 1803 involving William Marbury as the Plaintiff and James Madison as the Defendant (History.com staff‚ 2009). As a result of this case‚ the United States Supreme Court was granted the power to perform judicial review (“Judicial Review”‚ n.d.). With the power of judicial review‚ the United States Supreme Court is now permitted to review laws from the legislature and executive orders from the President to determine
Premium
Case1 Plaintiff(14) VS Defendant(11) February 20th 1889 Fact: Two boys were in a same high school of the village of Waukesha.11 years old boy kicked another 14 years old boy which caused the boy never recovered the use of his limb. The former was sued by the latter for $2800. Issue: whether a person who unintentionally hurt another person is liable for the harm through intentional harm. Holdings: the jury rendered a verdict for the plaintiff of $2800. Rationale: the touch was the
Premium Contract