Tennessee v. Reeves. 917 S.W.2d 825 (Supreme Court of Tennessee‚ 1996) On the evening of January 5‚ 1993‚ Tracie Reeves and Molly Coffman‚ both twelve years of age and students at West Carroll Middle School‚ spoke on the telephone and decided to kill their homeroom teacher‚ Janice Geiger. They agreed that Coffman would bring rat poison to school the following days so that it could be placed in Geiger ’s drink. After that ‚ they would steal Geiger ’s car and drive to the Smoky Mountains. On the
Premium Appeal Appellate court Trial court
Joanne Casillas Advanced Legal Writing June 2‚ 2014 Gonzalez ex rel. v. Reno‚ 86 F. Supp. 2d 1167 (SD. Fla. 2000) Facts: The parties in this case are Elian Gonzalez with Lazaro Gonzalez and Attorney General Janet Reno. In November 25‚ 1999 the United States Coast Guard intercepted two fishermen who had rescued five- year- old Elian Gonzalez floating on an inner tube in the Atlantic Ocean off the coast from Florida. Elian’s mother had died during the voyage from Cuba to
Premium United States Constitution United States Supreme Court of the United States
Emily Head CRJU 314 Koppersmith v. Alabama 742 So. 2d 206 (Ala. 1999) Concurrences: Judge Long‚ Judge McMillan‚ and Judge Fry Dissents: N/A Facts: Koppersmith and his wife Cindy were fighting in their front yard when Cindy tried to go inside. As she tried to enter the house Koppersmith stopped her and a physical dispute ensued. Cindy fell off the porch and into the yard. She died from a skull fractures to the back of her head. In Koppersmith’s statement he told police that him and Cindy
Premium Jury Appeal Court
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
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
MARYLAND v. GARRISON 480 U.S. 79 (1987) FACTS: The Baltimore City Police department obtained a warrant to search the home of Lawrence McWebb located “third floor of 2036 Park Avenue” for controlled substances and related paraphernalia. The police believed that there was only one apartment on the third floor‚ which in fact there were actually 2; one belonging to Garrison (defendant) and McWebb‚ the person listed on the warrant. Upon entering and searching the apartment‚ officers found drugs and
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Constable Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
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
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
Mazzagati v. Everingham‚ 512 Pa. 266 (1986). Facts: An automobile driven by Defendant fatally struck Plaintiff’s daughter. At the time of the accident‚ Plaintiff received a telephone call immediately after the collision at work informing her that her daughter had been involved in an automobile accident. Plaintiff arrived at the scene of the accident a few minutes later. Procedural Posture: Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment in the nature of a Demurrer granted by the Montgomery County
Premium Law Negligence Plaintiff