Case Brief LAW/531 October 26‚ 2011 Facts In the case Zehmer v. Lucy‚ Zehmer created an agreement that Lucy would sell his farm for 50‚000 dollars. While at the bar drinking Zehmer had his wife sign the contract. Lucy tried to close the deal with a five dollar deposit and Zehmer refused it stating the contract was a joke. Lucy is suing Zehmer for breach of contract. Issues Is the contract between Zehmer and Lucy valid
Premium Contract
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
Johnson Luu 12/25/13 Legal Brief Case Case Name: Canadian Odeon Theatres Ltd. v. Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission and Huck Facts: Michael Huck who is on a wheelchair was denied from Odeon theatre that he cannot sit where he wants to sit due to the fact that he is on a wheelchair. He was discriminated by the movie theatres because the only place he can watch the movie is in the first row sits and he was also too close to the screen which interfered with his view and his enjoyment
Premium Disability Wheelchair Law
Serenity coronado 9-12-2016 New Mexico “Come on boog we need to go and pick up Granny” “Ok” I say to my Grandma. “Ok Grandma I’m good now‚ do we have everything “? “Yes we do have everything we have the close the food and the drinks too” said my Grandma . We drove to my Granny’s house‚ it does not take so long it is alony like 20 minutes to get there. Then we were there and we seen my Granny waiting by her steps and me and my Grandma lafit at her because whenever we go and pick her up
Premium
Case Brief Assignment: State v. Kelbel Monique Ramirez JS 143 Professor Peterson Case: State v. Kelbel Facts: Kyle John Kelbel was convicted of first-degree murder‚ past pattern of child abuse‚ in violation of Minnesota state statute section 609.185(5) and second-degree murder‚ in violation of Minnesota statute 609.19‚ subdivision 2(1). He was sentenced to life in prison for the death of Kailyn Marie Montgomery. Kelbel appealed‚ and argued that the district court failed to instruct
Premium Jury Law Murder
To the rising stars of jewelry‚ the essence of New Mexico’s tradition is innovation and refinement. It goes beyond turquoise and silver. A new group of makers is “blowing the doors off the craft‚” one expert said. Call them disrupters. And these innovators don’t intend to be defined or limited by the turquoise-and-silver pairing that many people identify as the very symbol of Southwestern style. “Visitors come to Santa Fe expecting traditional Southwestern jewelry‚” said Lawrence Baca‚ who works
Premium Marketing United States Brand
Case: Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Facts: In March 1963‚ a kidnapping and sexual assault happened in Phoenix‚ Arizona. On March 13 Ernesto Miranda‚ 23‚ was arrested in his home‚ taken to the police station‚ recognized by the victim‚ and taken into an interrogation room. Miranda was not told of his rights to counsel prior to questioning. Investigators emerged from the room with a written confession signed by Miranda. It included a typed disclaimer‚ also signed by Miranda‚ stating that he had “full knowledge
Premium
Robey v. Hinners Facts: In 2005‚ Robey who runs his business in Sikeston‚ Missouri sold a used 2002 Cadillac Escalade to a Kentucky resident‚ Hinner‚ over ebay auction. As Robey advertised‚ the car was “clean‚ better and average” and with an “ 1 month/1‚000 mile Service Agreement”. After Hinner bought the car‚ he realized that the car was not as advertised. Robey argued that since he was not a resident‚ and the lack of personal jurisdiction that he should be dismissed. Issue: Even though
Premium Jurisdiction United States Appeal
i. Case Citation Goss v. Lopez‚ 419 U.S. 565 (1975) ii. Facts Public school students from Columbus‚ Ohio brought this suit. They claimed that their constitutional right to due process was violated. The students were suspended without hearing prior to their suspension. They were suspended for destroying school property but principals can only suspend up to 10 days or expel them. If suspended they must notify parents without 24 hours and give the reasons. Students may appeal to the
Premium Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution United States Constitution Education
Sandy Cheng CASE BRIEFS Interhandel Case (Switz. v. U.S.)‚ 1959 I.C.J. 6 (Mar. 21) Case Facts The Interhandel case was brought before the Court by Switzerland on October 2nd‚ 1957 to declare that the United States was under an obligation to restore its assets which had been vested in the United States from 1942. In 1946‚ US and Switzerland entered an agreement called the Washington Accord that the US will unblock Swiss assets in the US. Interhandel is a Swiss company entered in the Commercial
Premium United States United States Declaration of Independence