Title: R. v. Hufsky‚ [1988] 1 S.C.R 621 Parties: Werner E. J. Hufsky – Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen - Respondent Decision: Appeal was dismissed Notions/Concepts: Constitutional Law Criminal Law Equality before the law Charter of Rights and Freedoms Arbitrary detention Unreasonable Search Refusal to provide breath sample Facts: Appellant was stopped at a random spot check by police Nothing unusual about his driving at the time of the spot check Spot check was for the purposes
Premium Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Supreme Court of the United States
Friday Shop and the owners of the apartments (Claimants) to write an opinion to establish if they are able to claim for damages from Boutique Bugs (Defendant) for the amount of $1‚100‚000 based on the elements of the rule in Rylands v Fletcher. Rylands v Fletcher (R v. F) is based on the doctrine of Strict Liability. This means that the defendant is liable for all damages caused by engaging in hazardous of dangerous activities. Blackburn J at 279 states “We think that the true rule of the law is
Premium Escape Tort Legal terms
Matter of Annette B. CJ 310 Matter of Annette B. Matter of Annette B. In the Matter of Annette B.‚ the father made periodic and insignificant efforts to find his child once his confinement was over with. There was inadequate evidence to disprove a conclusion of abandonment. There was very little the dad could do while incarcerated. The grandmother of the child either could not or would not help locate the mother‚ and the Department of Social Services in New York wouldn’t help
Premium Family Mother Parent
Wallace v. Jaffree How did the Three Branches of government respond to the social issues of freedom of religion based on Wallace v. Jaffree case? Name: Thao-My Bui Date: 11/4/2014 IB History of the American Word count: 1989 Table of Contents A. Plan of Investigation 3 B. Summary of evidence………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..3 C. Evaluation of Sources……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…6 D. Analysis…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Premium United States Supreme Court of the United States Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Final Exam Case Brief Padilla v. Kentucky The question here is whether or not the petitioner‚ Jose Padilla‚ will be deported on account that he had plead guilty to a crime but allegedly had his sixth amendment right violated. There are multiply issues here. The first issue here is Padilla plead guilty to a drug offense that took place in the United States. The second issue is he claims his counsel did not inform him about the consequences of his plea bargain and he was misinformed about the possibility
Premium Crime Law Supreme Court of the United States
From chefs to construction jobbers‚ employees in New York risk work injuries every day‚ and the Bronx personal injury law firm Stephen B. Kaufman‚ P.C.‚ wants you to be prepared if it happens to you. Attorney Kaufman‚ an experienced premises liability lawyer in New York‚ is devoted to protecting the rights of injured workers throughout New York City‚ because he knows the impact a workplace injury can have on your life. Attorney Kaufman recommends taking these steps immediately when you get hurt
Premium Employment Health care Health insurance
employer must have ‘strong basis in evidence‚’ that will be subject to ‘disparate impact liability’ if it fails to take discriminatory action.” Similar to City of Richmond v. Croson‚ the court declared there was not sufficient evidence to require special actions to be taken to fight
Premium Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution Reverse discrimination United States Constitution
In Arizona‚ Arizona Revised Statute section 25-327(B) states: "Unless otherwise agreed in writing or expressly provided in the decree‚ the obligation to pay future maintenance is terminated on the death of either party or the remarriage of the party receiving maintenance." In the case of Kathy I. Palmer‚ Petitioner/Appellee‚ v. Sydney N. Palmer‚ Respondent/Appellant‚ Sydney (husband) referenced the above statute when filing for termination of spousal maintenance. The court had to consider whether
Premium United States Marriage Employment
non-client in order for that auditing firm to be liable for any damages done unto the third party. In the Ultramares v. Touche case‚ the judges found that a liability arose out of a duty that Touche‚ the accounting firm‚ owed to the non-client‚ Ultramares. Touche certified that their client‚ for whom they were performing the audit‚ was solvent when in fact it was not. In the case‚ it is pointed out that Touche knew their client was borrowing at large sums and required “certified balance sheets for
Premium Tort Accountant Audit
Case 3-B Romanus Iheanacho Cindy the wife of Larry (Executive Committee member) was fired after an heated exchange between her and Sonja (a recently hired employee); during a meeting between the two and Jill the onsite manager. With further investigation by Heather as a reader we’re able to receive insight that the meeting was possibly a planned attempt to fire Cindy. Earlier in the day a Builtwell property maintenance manager asked where was Cindy during his visit‚ Jill quickly responded stating
Premium Management English-language films Employment