Week 2 Case Summary For reference file # 8402 date issued January 17‚ 2013 Indexed as MacDonald v. Najafi and another (No.2) 2013 BCHRT 13 Facts The case I picked was heard on June 18 to19‚ 2012 in front of Murray Geiger Adams who is a member of the tribunal. The claimant is Ms. Macdonald‚ who is a university grad that moved to Vancouver from Calgary. The respondents are Mr. Najafi and his company Sign-A-Rama based in Vancouver. Mr. Najafi’s has adult children and is in his 60’s lived
Premium Discrimination Vancouver
treatment to treat the problem they believe is controlling their life‚ or a form of guidance. Throughout the following essay we will be considering the case of Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California and discuss why the following case is important to mental health clinicians. Along with describing the violence risk assessment
Premium Violence Psychology Mental disorder
two court cases were being held in the supreme court about cruel and unusual punishment. Ingraham Vs. Wright (1977) and Gregg Vs. Georgia (1976). I choose to compare these because they both favored common good instead of individual rights and had a lot of similar aspects of their trials. During these Supreme Court cases Gregg Vs. Georgia showed more balance between the promoting the common good and protecting the individual rights than Ingraham Vs. Wright showed in 1977. In the court case of Ingraham
Premium Capital punishment Murder Supreme Court of the United States
value of an individual’s property. In order to exercise this jurisdiction‚ the plaintiff must have seized and attached the property. In an effort to expand jurisdiction‚ the court instituted the minimum contacts test. This test was expanded by Hess v. Pawloski‚ when a Massachusetts court determined that due his activities within the state‚ a nonresident of Massachusetts was still subject to the court’s jurisdiction‚ regarding a suit for a traffic accident. The court held that use of a state’s highways
Premium Jurisdiction Civil procedure
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 a specified end date in the Decree took precedence over the general interpretation of the law. Facts of the Case: Palmer v. Palmer The facts of this case are as follows: The marriage between Palmer and Palmer was dissolved
Premium United States Marriage Employment
people peaceably to assemble‚ and to petition the government for a redress of grievances” (http://www.law.cornell.edu). Over the years there have been many court cases that try to help decipher what is mean by the 1st amendment. In 1942 commercial speech was introduced by the Supreme Court with the Valentine V. Chrestensen case. Commercial Speech is speech done on behalf of a company or individual for the intent of making a profit. It is economic in nature and usually has the intent of convincing
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States
Charter Case Analysis: Vriend v. Alberta 1. Delwin Vriend filed a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission because he believes that he was discriminated against by his employer after being fired when his employer became aware that Mr. Vriend was a homosexual. 2. The Alberta Human Rights Commission said that Vriend could not make a complaint under the IRPA because sexual orientation was not covered under the protected grounds of the IRPA. 3. Mr. Vriend claims that the IRPA violated
Premium
Case 5 Magrec‚ Inc. 1. I would let a day pass and then request another meeting with Dinah indicating a sincere desire to work through the matter and the need to come to an understanding and agreement of how to work together and with the team moving forward. At that meeting‚ I would start off and thank Dinah for bringing the Partco matter to my attention. I would communicate with Dinah that I respect her strong feelings and beliefs behind her actions regarding the Partco matter but indicate
Premium Social psychology Cognitive dissonance Cognition
C.Richmond v. Croson(1989) D.The case deals with the city Council of Richmond passing a law that made is so companies that had construction contracts with the city had to subcontract at least 30 percent of their business to a business that has minority ownership. This lead to the J.A. Croson Company losing a contract because the company does not have a minority owner. This lead to the company starting a suit against Richmond. E. Is the law passed by Richmond breaching the fourteenth amendment’s equal
Premium High school Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution
Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District 393 U.S. 503 "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate." This was the main argument from Justice Abe Fortas that came into play at the Tinker v. Des Moines School District Case of 1969. The case involved a small group of students who silently dissented against the government’s policy during the ongoing Vietnam War by wearing black
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution