Page 1 1 of 3 DOCUMENTS M.A. MORTENSON COMPANY‚ INC.‚ Petitioner‚ v. TIMBERLINE SOFTWARE CORPORATION and SOFTWORKS DATA SYSTEMS‚ INC.‚ Respondents. No. 67796--4 SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON 140 Wn.2d 568; 998 P.2d 305; 2000 Wash. LEXIS 287; CCH Prod. Liab. Rep. P15‚893; 41 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (Callaghan) 357 October 26‚ 1999‚ Oral Argument Date May 4‚ 2000‚ Filed PRIOR HISTORY: [***1] Appeal from Superior Court‚ King County. 95--2--31991--2. Honorable Phillip Hubbard‚ Judge. DISPOSITION: Court
Premium United States Appeal Supreme Court of the United States
allegedly taken from Spencer was simple documents which included some forms. These forms were not considered to be proprietary and/or controlled and therefore the confidentiality agreement was informational only. The case of Hauck Mfg. Co. (Hauck) v. Astec Industries Incorporated (Astec) is also a case that would support Giere. This case focuses on supposed confidential information that was exchanged for the development of burners used specifically for these businesses. The problem with this case
Premium Management Employment Project management
Words can influence‚ build‚ inspire or even demolish an individual. They are the most powerful weapon in the history of civilization‚ since they are capable of changing a person’s life for the better or even drive someone insane. In the play “Henry V” by William Shakespeare one can easily admire the power that words have on individuals through the famous king’s speeches. They inspire and even sometimes intimidate the audience. His speeches are also an essential part of the play‚ without them England
Premium William Shakespeare Macbeth Duncan I of Scotland
In the Greynolds v. Kurman case‚ I agree with the court’s decision. “There was sufficient evidence to support a finding of lack of informed consent” (Pozgar & Santucci‚ 2015‚ p. 339). When I read the case it seemed like the physicians did not put any effort in explaining the complete picture‚ including the Greynolds options‚ and letting them decide what they wanted. By law‚ “when there is doubt as to a patient’s capacity to consent‚ the consent of the legal guardian or next of kin should be obtained”
Premium Patient Health care Health care provider
Rules Miranda vs. Arizona 1966 Michalle Cochrane(Wilborn)‚ Stephanie Cox‚ Shereka White and Vanetia Riley CJA 364 June 10‚ 2013 Jonathan Sperling Rules Miranda vs. Arizona 1966 In 1966 Miranda v. Arizona was a landmark of a decision to the United States Supreme Court‚ in which this was passed because it had four out of five agreeing. The Court held both exculpatory and inculpatory statements in which was made in response to interrogation by
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Supreme Court of the United States Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Case: Foss v Harbottle (1843) 2 Hare 461 Two shareholders of a company brought action against directors of the company for misapplication and improper use of the company’s property. The court held that as the injury complained of was injury to the company and not to the members. As such the members could not take action. Only the company had the right to sue. Case:In the case of Re Noel Tedman Holdings Pty Ltd. (1967) QdR 561; The company had a husband and a wife as its only shareholders
Premium Death Share Life
Change in “V for Vendetta” Juxtaposed With Change in “Ode on a Grecian Urn” Alan Moore published the first part of “V for Vendetta” in 1982 and the second part in 1983. The novel takes place in dystopian England in the year 1997. Many different plots and characters inhabit the tale’s world‚ but the two protagonists consist of V‚ an anarchist revolutionary with a strong vendetta against the current fascist government‚ and Evey Hammond‚ a sixteen-year-old girl that V takes under his wing and educated
Premium V for Vendetta Totalitarianism English-language films
Indexed as: Silber (c.o.b. Stacey’s Furniture World) v. British Columbia Television Broadcasting System Ltd. Between Arnold Silber‚ and Value Industries Ltd.‚ carrying on business as Stacey’s Furniture World‚ plaintiffs‚ and British Columbia Television Broadcasting System Ltd.‚ Dale Hicks and Ken Chu‚ defendants [1985] B.C.J. No. 3012 [1986] 2 W.W.R. 609 69 B.C.L.R. 34 Vancouver Registry No. C812859 British Columbia Supreme Court Vancouver‚ British Columbia Lysyk J. Heard: November
Premium Privacy law Privacy Tort
5th May 3013 V for Vendetta In compare and contrast of the film and the graphic novel of V for Vendetta starts with The voice of fate announcing its curfew to the people of London. A 16 year old girl prostitute herself for money and the guy she tries to sell herself for is a fingermen. The fingermen begin to rape her when a man in a cape walks out of the shadows. The fingerman grabs mans wrist which was pulled off. The man in the mask and cape sprayed tear gas‚ saves the girl. The fingermen that
Premium V for Vendetta
Jaffee v.Redmond (1996) The case of Jaffee v. Redmond was taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1996. The issue was whether a psychotherapist-patient would be recognized under Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The Court granted a decision that recognized the existence of such a privilege holding that confidential communications of a licensed social worker and a police officer be protected from compelled disclosure As reported by Levy (1996)‚ the Court decided that all communication between
Premium United States Jury Supreme Court of the United States