Case Brief #1 Tieera Hill Metropolitan State University Case Brief #1 Relevant facts of the case The court case Harrison v. Benchmark Electronics Huntsville involves a dispute concerning the employment of John Harrison (plaintiff) at a company called Benchmark Electronics Huntsville Inc (BEHI). Aerotek is a company that helps with placing temporary workers at BEHI and they assigned the plaintiff to work at the company as a Debug Tech. The plaintiff suffers from epilepsy‚ but he
Premium Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Employment Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Salinas V. Texas 570 U.S. 1 (2013) Facts: Two brothers were shot and killed in their home. Police recovered shotgun shells that led them to investigate the petitioner. The petitioner handed over his gun and agreed to go to the police station for questioning. The petitioner answered all of the questions the police had‚ but when it came to the question about the shells matching the petitioner’s gun he went silent. So the police asked a few more questions to which the petitioner answered.
Premium Question Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution Crime
Recommendation Brief Julio Santos University of Phoenix Internal Control Systems ACC/544 Joseph Poletti February 08‚ 2013 Recommendation Brief Benefits An internal auditor is a person who works for a company and learns everything about the company and has intricate knowledge of the workings. They will work specifically in one company and be able to concentrate on everything in the company. Auditors can catch problems when they arise and bring them to attention to the people in charge before
Premium Auditing Internal control Internal audit
Susan M. V. New York Law School‚ No. 129‚ Court of Appeals of New York‚ 76 N.Y. 2d 241; 556 N.E. 2d 1104; 557 N.Y.S. 2d 297; 1990 N.Y. LEXIS 1413‚ April 26 1990‚ Argued‚ June 14‚ 1990‚ Decided Facts: Petitioner law student was placed on academic probation after her first year of law school. A year later‚ having failed to maintain a minimum cumulative average as required by respondent law school’s rules‚ she was dismissed after a hearing of respondent’s academic status committee. She sought reinstatement
Premium Appeal Law Appellate court
Module Code: SM0381 Module Title: Applied Business Ethics Distributed on: 23 September 2013 Hand in Date: See NBS Office Notice Board Instructions on Assessment: “Tomorrow’s business leaders need to be nimble and to incorporate all aspects of good decision making in an increasingly global and complex business environment. Ethical leadership is vital to the future of ....business. Our world is rapidly changing – and the changes affect every business‚ every industry and every country.
Premium Ethics Business ethics Morality
HELMER et al. v. RUMARSON TECHNOLOGIES‚ INC. (two cases) Court of Appeals of Georgia‚ 2000. 245 Ga. App. 598‚ 538 S.E.2d 504 FACTS Rumarson Technologies‚ Inc. (RTI) sued Robert and Percy Helmer to collect from them personally $24‚965 owed to it by Event Marketing‚ Inc. (EMI) when EMI’s check to pay RTI bounced. Robert and Percy Helmer were authorized signatories on EMI’s corporate account‚ and they signed the check. RTI argued that as signatories they could be held personally liable. The lower
Premium Appeal Cheque Court
BRIEFING A CASE EXAMPLE Student Name: Class: Case Number: PATTERSON V. McLean Credit Union 491 U.S. 164 (1989) FACTS: Patterson‚ a black female‚ worked for the McLean Credit Union as a teller and file coordinator for ten years. Patterson alleges that when she was first interviewed for her job‚ the supervisor‚ who later became the president of McLean Credit Union‚ told her that she would be working with all white women and they probably would not like working with her because she
Premium United States Race Black people
CAS 9-LINE BRIEF (GOOD FOR FIXED WING OR ANY U.S. CAS A/C) */**/***/ ‡/§ IP/BP:”_______________________________” HEADING:”_______” (DEG MAG‚ IP/BP TO TGT) OFFSET: ”_______” (L/R) DISTANCE: ”________” (IP TO TGT IN NM FOR F/W‚ CENTER OF BP TO TGT IN METERS FOR R/W) TGT ELEVATION: ”_____________” (FEET MSL) TGT DESCRIPTION: ”___________________” TGT LOCATION: ”______________________” (INCLUDE GRID ZONE ID) TYPE MARK: ”________________________‚”
Free Metropolitana di Napoli Madrid Metro Osaka Municipal Subway
S.H.A.R.K. v. Metro Parks Serving Summit County United States Court of Appeals‚ Ninth Judicial District 499 F3d 553 (2009) MOORE‚ Presiding Judge Rule of Law: The Privacy Protection Act (PPA) and the First Amendment rights were brought into question by the Plaintiffs. The judges ruled out the violation of the First Amendment rights and focused on the Privacy Protection Act as the main claimed offense. FACTS: Steve Hindi is the founder of S.H.A.R.K‚ a non-profit corporation that exposes
Free Supreme Court of the United States First Amendment to the United States Constitution
Moore v. Midwest Distribution‚ Inc.‚ 76 Ark. App. 397‚ 65 S.W. 3d 490 (Ark. Ct. App. 2002) FACTS: Appellee (Midwest Distribution‚ Inc.)‚ who is in the business of setting up cigarette product displays‚ contracted to hire appellant (Moore) in 2001 to work at its Fort Smith office. Upon accepting employment‚ appellant signed an employment contract‚ a “Service work for Hire Agreement” with appellee that contained a non-compete agreement – in which appellant agreed that for one year following the
Premium Contract Employment Trial court