In school student rights can be limited. There are several court cases that cover these rights. Here are a couple of them. Unreasonable Searches & Seizures- In the New Jersey v. T.L.O. case‚ T.LO. and her friend were accused by a teacher for smoking in the bathroom. Her friend admitted to‚ but T.L.O kept denying it. The teacher brought her purse to the principal‚ and the principal demanded to see her purse. Proof that T.LO. was selling drugs was found. They took it to the police and she finally committed
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution
In Hilgendorf v. Hague the Supreme Court of Iowa determined that Hague had the power‚ but not the right‚ to terminate the agency relationship with Hilendorf (“Hilendorf‚” n.d.). An agency relationship can be terminated by an act of both parties‚ an unusual change of circumstances‚ impossibility of performance‚ and operation of law (Cheeseman‚ 2013‚ p. 393). In the case of Hilgendorf v. Hague‚ the contract was not terminated by an act of both parties‚ because Hilgendorf (agent) did not acquiesce
Premium Contract Law Contract law
Case Brief: R v.Shankar Citation: Regina v. Corey Shankar‚ 2007 ONCA 280 (CanLII) Facts: The accused was driving his car without the required laminated taillights when officers pulled him over late October 2004. The police asked Shankar for his licence‚ registration‚ and insurance. The accused handed over a licence in the name of Jason Singh‚ the insurance information handwritten on an informal yellow sticky note‚ and a photocopy of the vehicle registration. When inquired about the spelling of
Premium Appeal English-language films Judgment
Allen v. Totes/Isotoner 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
Premium Pregnancy Discrimination Prima facie
__________________________________________________________ IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES _____________ ANDREA “ANDY” SOMMERVILLE‚ Petitioners-Appellants v. WLLIAM DENOLF Respondent-Appellee ------------------------------------------------- On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventeenth Circuit _____________ BRIEF FOR RESPONDENT _____________ QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1) Whether the Gun Free School Zone Act of 1997 (18 USC 922 q) applies to DeNolf
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States United States Constitution
estimate the value of the card. The expert said that even in a tough economy the card would likely bring $80‚000 at public auction. Mrs. Covington brings an equitable action to rescind the contract‚ get her card back and return the $1 to Michael. Case: Elizabeth Covington vs. Michael Ferrell (2010) Facts: Elizabeth Covington versus Michael Ferrell. Plaintiff: Elizabeth Covington brings an equitable action movement to court against Michael Ferrell to receive legal relief for Michael Ferrell having
Premium Baseball
Legal Memorandum vs. Case Brief A case brief is a short summary of a reported case. Students write case briefs to summarize cases they have read for class to keep track of the large number of cases students are required to read and analyze. During legal research case briefs serve to help the researcher keep track of the cases read and analyzed and can serve as the foundation for legal arguments in trial briefs or other documents filed with the court. Basically‚ a case brief summarizes the components
Premium Law Appeal Jury
Civ Pro II I. Joinder A. Joinder By ∆s: 3d Party Claims (Impleader Rule 14) 1. Cases a. Price v. CTB – Latco moved to file a 3rd party complaint against ITW who designed the nails used in the chicken house. Can implead under Rule 14 against someone who may be liable “A 3rd party claim will not be permitted when it is based upon a separate & independent claim. Rather‚ the 3rd party liability must in some way be derivative of the original claim; a 3rd party may be impleaded
Premium Law Contract Common law
1. Name and Citation R. v. Williams‚ [1998] 1 S.C.R. 1128 2. Type and Level of Case This case was heard by the British Colombia Court of Appeal on February 24th‚ 1998 and a decision was made on June 4th‚ 1998. 3. Facts The accused‚ an aboriginal man‚ pleaded guilty to robbery charge‚ saying that the robbery was done by someone other than himself. He was elected a trail by judge and jury. First Trail; questions were asked to jury to assure the jury was unbiased‚ 12 of 43 potential jurors were dismissed
Premium Jury Court Appeal
CRUZAN‚ BY HER PARENTS AND CO-GUARDIANS‚ CRUZAN ET UX. v. DIRECTOR‚ MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH‚ ET AL. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 497 U.S. 261; 110 S. Ct. 2841; 111 L. Ed. 2d 224; 1990 U.S. LEXIS 3301 December 6‚ 1989‚ Argued June 25‚ 1990‚ Decided PRIOR HISTORY: CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI. DISPOSITION: 760 S. W. 2d 408‚ affirmed. JUDGES: REHNQUIST‚ C. J.‚ delivered the opinion of the Court‚ in which WHITE‚ O’CONNOR‚ SCALIA‚ and KENNEDY
Free Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution United States