Communication Corporation‚ 306 F.3d 17 (2nd Cir. 2002). I. FACTS Plaintiffs sued‚ Netscape‚ a software internet company who distributed the free software SmartDownload‚ for electronic eavesdropping. The Plaintiffs alleged Defendant violated two federal statutes‚ the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act‚ by capturing private information about files downloaded from the Internet . Plaintiffs filed suit against Defendant in District Court and Defendant moved
Premium Law Civil procedure Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
court reporter‚ sheriff‚ defendant - SEQUOIA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT PRESENT WITH COUNSEL JOHN SHUPE‚ Plaintiff - MANUEL E DELGADO JR PRESENT WITH COUNSEL DAVID SECREST‚ MATTHEW ZITO‚ PRINCIPAL FOR MENLO ATHERTON HIGH‚ WITNESS KAREN ANN BRESLOW‚ WITNESS CLAUDIA KISPERSKY1 and 16 jurors were present in the court. 2. Sketch TBD 3. Plaintiff‚ Mr. Delgado lost employment as a schoolteacher. Plaintiff is suing the district on the grounds of racial discrimination. This is a jury trial and jury consisted
Premium Jury Criminal law
Southern District of Florida. FACTS The Plaintiff‚ Elian Gonzalez‚ is a 6 year old minor who was put into the care of his great uncle after surviving an accident on the sea and rescued. His great uncle received temporary legal custody and filed an asylum application on his behalf against the wishes of his father‚ whom lived in Cuba. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) rejected the application as legally void causing the minor Plaintiff to appeal to the district court. The district
Premium Law United States Appeal
to provide a complaint with a standing:- 1. he or she has a particular grievance of his or her own 2. he or she is a member of the public who has been inconvenienced 3. a mere stranger There are three locus standi requirements. Firstly‚ the plaintiff must suffered injury. The injury could be economic or non-economic. Second‚ there must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of‚ so that the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and not
Premium Insurance Contract Common law
Pittston Coal Company be held liable for the emotional damages and psychic impairments of the plaintiffs? Do the plaintiffs fall within the “zone of danger‚” established for NEID cases? Legal Issues Owing to the fact that many of the victims of the Buffalo Creek disaster suffered mental anguish or “psychic impairments” rather than simply physical injuries‚ the question arises in this case whether or not the plaintiffs may recover for these psychic impairments. Argument Black’s Law Dictionary defines "mental
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Dam
Table of Contents Wrongful Dismissal 2 Just Cause 2 Reasonable Notice 4 Constructive Dismissal 5 Watson v. Seacastle Enterprises Inc. 5 Did the defendant wrongfully dismiss the plaintiff? 6 Did the defendant constructively dismiss the plaintiff? 7 What are the damages owed to the plaintiff? 8 Impact on the Hospitality Industry 9 Conclusion 1 Recommendation 1 Work Cited 1 What is Wrongful Dismissal? Dismissal refers to the employer ’s choice to let go of the employee generally
Premium Employment Termination of employment Burger King
Murlidhar Hemdev and Others v Kanhaiyalal Lokram Hemdev and Others Supreme Court of India 14 May 1999 Appeal (civil) 3141 of 1999 The Judgment was delivered by : M. Jagannadha Rao‚ J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is filed by the four plaintiffs‚ the widow and children of late Murlidhar Lokram Hemdev who died intestate on or about 8.5.1976. The appeal is directed against the order of the High Court of Bombay in Appeal No. 1019 of 1997 dated 12.9.97 confirming the order of the learned Single
Premium
must find before an action towards defamation can be made out. First the words themselves must be defamatory or capable of defaming the plaintiff. Secondly the words must refer to the plaintiff. Thirdly‚ the words must be published to one other person than the plaintiff. Therefore the defamatory statements must be exposed to someone other than the plaintiff. Intermediate liability - the channel which facilitates the defamatory statements may or may not be liable depending on the platforms
Premium Tort Negligence
failure of individuals to appreciate the risks caused by their conduct. • Synonymous with carelessness did not intend to cause harm to Plaintiff • To determine whether negligence exists‚ must ask: 1. Was the Defendant’s conduct unreasonable? 2. Did the Defendant cause the Plaintiff’s injury? Elements of Negligence: 1. Duty by the Defendant to the Plaintiff 2. Defendant breached the duty of reasonable care 3. Defendant’s actions were the proximate cause (nearest cause/ number of factors that
Premium Tort Tort law
Case Study Case 1 A Sydney tramway passenger was injured in a collision with another tram‚ which occurred after the driver collapsed at the controls. The plaintiff argued that the collision could have been avoided if the tramway authority had fitted the tram with a system known as ‘dead man’s handle’‚ a system in use on Sydney’s trains. This would have stopped the tram and avoided the accident. The device had been rejected by the tramway authorities because it was felt that it could cause drivers
Premium Tort law Tram accident Accident