Lucy v. Zehmer Case Brief Facts: Lucy made an offer to Zehmer one night while at his restaurant to purchase Zehmer’s farm for $50‚000. Zehmer and Lucy both signed an agreement that promised Zehmer would sell the farm to Lucy. Zehmer claimed later that the agreement to sell the farm was made when they were both drinking at Zehmer’s restaurant and that he only meant the acceptance as a joke. Zehmer didn’t believe that Lucy’s offer was genuine since they were both drinking and went along with
Premium Contract Supreme Court of the United States Appeal
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
Schmerber v. California Case Brief Schmerber v. California 384 U.S. 757 (1966) FACTS: Armando Schmerber‚ the petitioner‚ had been arrested for drunk driving while receiving treatment for injuries in a hospital. During his treatment‚ a police officer smelled liquor on petitioner’s breath and noticed other symptoms of drunkenness so the officer ordered a doctor to take a blood sample which indicated that Schmerber had been drunk while driving. The blood test was introduced as
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Appeal United States
Emilie Blanc October 14th Spectrum Brands Case Brief 1. Assess the Spectrum organization and each of the markets in which the company now operates. What are the key elements from each industry about which Falconi should be concerned? Key elements to be concerned Batteries Consumers look for convenience and quality Market leaders: Duracel and Energizer (80% market share) adaptation to consumer needs and valuable negotiating power with retailers Flat growth of the market (1-2% annually) but
Premium Sales Customer service Marketing
substance use. Identifying crucial details such as how long he has been experiencing these symptoms would greatly aid in the elimination process of potential diagnosis. For example‚ if this has only recently happened‚ Randall may be suffering with a Brief Psychotic Disorder (298.8). However‚ any time longer than one month can shift the diagnosis to Schizophreniform Disorder (295.40)‚ Major Depressive Disorder with psychotic features (296.22)‚ Bipolar Disorder with psychotic features (296.44)‚ or other
Premium Federal Bureau of Investigation Business ethics Ethics
R. v Burns case Brief Case Facts The defendants Glen Sebastian Burns and Atif Ahmad Rafay were accused to have committed aggravated first degree murder in Washington State. In a confession to an undercover RCMP officer in British Columbia‚ posing as a mob boss‚ it is clamed that Burns was a contract killer hired by Rafay to kill his parents so that Rafay could get insurance money for their deaths. It is claimed that Burns beat the victims with a baseball bat while Rafay watched (para.10). They
Premium Appeal Crime Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Leng Xiong Business Law Anderson September 11‚ 2013 Case Analysis #1 Austin V. Berryman Citation: Austin V. Berryman United States Supreme Court of Appeal‚ Fourth Circuit‚ 1989. Facts: Barbra Austin is challenging the Virginia Employment Commission for unemployment compensation benefits‚ which she chose to quit her job out of religious beliefs to fallow her spouse. Issue: She is claimed to be denied of her unemployment compensation benefits because she quilted due to her religious belief
Premium Faith United States Religion
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
Brief of McCart v H&R Block‚ Inc. Case Name‚ Citation‚ and Court Robert McCart and June McCart‚ v. H &R Block. Inc. 470 N.E.2d 756; 1984 Ind. App. LEXIS 3039 Court of Appeals of Indiana‚ Third District Key Facts Mr. McCart opened a tax preparation business and executed a contract with Block to be a district manager‚ which precluded him from operating a tax business in the same city. McCart then issued the city franchise to his wife. Years later‚ the wife signed a new franchise agreement
Premium Income tax in the United States Contract Taxation in the United States
Case Brief By: Ashley Tam R. v. Martineau (1991)‚ 58 C.C.C. (3d) 353 (S.C.C.) Facts: The appellant‚ Martineau‚ was convicted of second-degree murder under s. 213(a) and (d) of the Criminal Code but the decision was overturned by the Alberta Court of Appeal who concluded that s. 213(a) violated ss. 7 and 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and could no longer be in effect. The issue was brought before the Supreme Court of Canada whether or not the appeal court was correct in
Premium Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Abortion Canada