another point which the authors addressed in the article. In Turp v. Canada (2012)‚ the respondent (Canada) was brought up on charges for opting out of the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act (KPIA) (2012). The act was put in place as a measure to ensure Canada meet its targets under the Kyoto Protocol. However the Canadian government withdrew from the KPIA‚ and was subsequently brought to federal court. The court dismissed the case without cost‚ as they found the government’s reasoning for opting
Premium Management Globalization Strategic management
Park Min-jung (20080534) Fact : On June 9‚ 1974‚ Jerome Bourque(Plaintiff) was playing second base on a softball game. Duplechin(Defendant)‚ a member of the opposing team had hit the ball and advanced to first base. After his teammate hit the ball‚ to avoid double play Duplechin ran at full speed into Bourque. As Duplechin ran into Bourque‚ he brought his left arm up under Bourque’s chin. Plaintiff Bourque filed this suit to recover damages for personal injuries received in the collision.
Premium Tort Common law Tort law
testimony of his co-defendant‚ John Bryant‚ Jr.‚ to be considered against him; (5) that the Court erred in permitting the jury to separate overnight on the last day of the trial; and (6) that there were certain erroneous instructions. (Law Justia: State v. Mouzon (1957)‚ n.d.) Holding
Premium Crime Murder Capital punishment
GRAHAM v. CONNOR‚ 490 U.S. 386 (1989) Dethorne Graham‚ who is a diabetic‚ asked a friend‚ William Berry‚ to drive him to a store to purchase some juice to neutralize the start of an insulin reaction. When Dethorne Graham entered the store‚ he saw the number of people that would be ahead of him‚ Dethorne Graham hurried out and asked William Berry to drive him to a friend’s house instead. Connor‚ a Charlotte‚ North Carolina police officer‚ became wary after seeing Dethorne Graham quickly enter
Premium Law United States Tennessee v. Garner
Will the law recognize a contract between Moving Earth and Shake and Rattle LTD? Legal Relations Edwards v Skyways [1964] 1 WLR 349 held that it is necessary to determine between social and domestic agreements and agreements that are within a commercial context. Alison and Simon agreed to business relations and there was an intention to agree‚ a meeting of the minds. Offer Megalift v Terminals [2009] NSWSC 324 determined quotes can be a binding offer. Berging CJ Eq held that a quote that listed
Premium Contract Offer and acceptance
Farwell‚ Benjamin CJU 134 Chp.8‚ Pg 286 Miranda V Arizona FACTS: On March 16‚ 1963‚ Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and rape. Mr. Miranda was an immigrant‚ and although the officers did not notify Mr. Miranda of his rights‚ he signed a confession after two hours of investigation. The signed statement included a statement that Mr. Miranda was aware of his rights‚ although the officers admitted at trial that Mr.Miranda was not appraised of his right to have an attorney present
Premium Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution Miranda v. Arizona Law
(#4-7) According to the case‚ the plaintiff should not be held as semi liable for his injuries while attending the Daytona International Speedway. My client should receive a decision in his favor because NASCAR and the Daytona International Speedway were and are negligent in how
Premium American football Concussion National Football League
The case of Kansas v. Hendricks involves the respondent Hendricks filing suit against the State of Kansas in regards to the Sexually Violent Predator Act. Hendricks believed his incarceration through this Act would be considered double jeopardy and he was being convicted of the same crime twice. Hendricks had been found guilty of sexually molesting children. He was incarcerated and was nearing the end of his sentence when he filed the suit against the state of Kansas. The Sexually Violent Predator
Premium Crime Prison Capital punishment
US v. Nixon (1974) 1. The Constitutional Question(s) : a) Does the separation of powers established by the Constitution grant the President the absolute power to keep information from other branches of the government? b) Given that the power is not absolute‚ should President Nixon be capable of claiming executive privilege under the aforementioned circumstances? c) Does the separation of powers permit that the settlement of this dispute must stay contained in the executive branch or should
Premium Richard Nixon President of the United States Watergate scandal
7-Felthouse v Bindley (1862) 11 CBNS 869 (CCP) Summary: • “For a contract to come into existence‚ the offeree had to communicate his acceptance of the relevant offer to the offeror.” • This means that for a contract to come into play it has to be a bilateral agreement. One party cannot decide to enter someone else in a contract. Also‚ the case implies that changes in a contract nullify prior acceptances- if the contract changes‚ you need to agree the terms again. The Case: • F[elthouse]
Premium Contract