Blaustein V. Burto Brief Action: The plaintiff (Blaustein)‚ was looking to receive payment for the usage of his movie idea which resulted in the exhibition of a movie. Facts: Based on a movie idea‚ Mr. Blaustein the plaintiff‚ met with Hugh French‚ the agent for Richard Burton‚ Marting Gang‚ Mr. Burton’s Attorney‚ and Burton himself June 30th 1964. During that meeting‚ Mr. Blaustein pitched his idea to develop a movie based on Shakespeare’s play The Taming of the Shrew. He went into detailed
Premium Contract
Case Brief LAW/531 October 26‚ 2011 Facts In the case Zehmer v. Lucy‚ Zehmer created an agreement that Lucy would sell his farm for 50‚000 dollars. While at the bar drinking Zehmer had his wife sign the contract. Lucy tried to close the deal with a five dollar deposit and Zehmer refused it stating the contract was a joke. Lucy is suing Zehmer for breach of contract. Issues Is the contract between Zehmer and Lucy valid
Premium Contract
CASE BRIEF Case: State of Missouri v. David R. Bullock‚ 03CR679889.MO‚ [www.courts.mo.gov/casenet] Facts: At the time of the filing of his appeal‚ Mr. David R. Bullock had been charged and convicted of attempted statutory rape (under RSMO 566.032 and 564.011) and attempted sexual exploitation of a minor (under RSMO 564.011 and RSMO 566.032). David R. Bullock engaged in several conversations via email and chat rooms with a Newton County Deputy Sheriff who was conducting a sting operation
Premium Appeal Law
CASE BRIEF Title of Case: Stoneridge Investment Partners‚ LLC‚ Petitioner v. Scientific-Atlanta‚ Inc.‚ et al. 128 S. Ct. 761 (2008) Facts: The plaintiff‚ Stoneridge Investment Partners‚ LLC‚ presented a securities fraud class action against the defendant‚ Charter Communications’ vendors‚ Scientific-Atlanta. Charter communications is a publicly traded cable company that services millions of customers throughout America. Charter contracts with vendors for equipment that is used for their company
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Appeal
Johnson Luu 12/25/13 Legal Brief Case Case Name: Canadian Odeon Theatres Ltd. v. Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission and Huck Facts: Michael Huck who is on a wheelchair was denied from Odeon theatre that he cannot sit where he wants to sit due to the fact that he is on a wheelchair. He was discriminated by the movie theatres because the only place he can watch the movie is in the first row sits and he was also too close to the screen which interfered with his view and his enjoyment
Premium Disability Wheelchair Law
Case Brief Citation: New World Communications of Tampa‚ Inc.‚ d/b/a WTVT-TV v. Jane Akre February 14‚ 2003. Denied February 25‚ 2004. 866 So. 2d 1231 District Court of Appeal of Florida‚ Second District. Facts: In 1998‚ investigative reporting team‚ Jane Akre and her husband Steve Wilson‚ brought suit against their employer WVTV‚ a subsidiary of Fox TV‚ under violation of Florida’s whistle-blower statutes. They argued that the station had terminated their employment under
Premium Law Appeal United States
DEVRY UNIVERSITY 3005 HIGHLAND PKWY DOWNERS GROVE‚ IL 60515-5799 Terms: (Nadel v. Burger King Corp.‚ 1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 2144) Source: Company Profiles and Directories;US Law Reviews and Journals‚ Combined;Federal & State Court Cases - After 1944‚ Combined;Newspaper Stories‚ Combined Papers Combined Source: Company Profiles and Directories;US Law Reviews and Journals‚ Combined;Federal & State Court Cases - After 1944‚ Combined;Newspaper Stories‚ Combined Papers Project ID: 7 of 8
Free Product liability
Robey v. Hinners Facts: In 2005‚ Robey who runs his business in Sikeston‚ Missouri sold a used 2002 Cadillac Escalade to a Kentucky resident‚ Hinner‚ over ebay auction. As Robey advertised‚ the car was “clean‚ better and average” and with an “ 1 month/1‚000 mile Service Agreement”. After Hinner bought the car‚ he realized that the car was not as advertised. Robey argued that since he was not a resident‚ and the lack of personal jurisdiction that he should be dismissed. Issue: Even though
Premium Jurisdiction United States Appeal
from harm. In the fact that she did not exercise this duty‚ she then breached this duty. The breaching of this duty of care resulted in the actual causation of the facts that led to the plaintiffs Jim’s injuries. Rule of Law: Res Ipsa Loquitur. This case falls under the rule of
Premium Tort Law Tort law
i. Case Citation Goss v. Lopez‚ 419 U.S. 565 (1975) ii. Facts Public school students from Columbus‚ Ohio brought this suit. They claimed that their constitutional right to due process was violated. The students were suspended without hearing prior to their suspension. They were suspended for destroying school property but principals can only suspend up to 10 days or expel them. If suspended they must notify parents without 24 hours and give the reasons. Students may appeal to the
Premium Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Education