Case Brief Funk vs. United States Supreme Court of the United States 290 U.S. 371‚ 54 S. Ct. 212 (1933) Facts: Funk was tried twice and convicted both times in Federal District Court for conspiracy to violate the prohibition law. In the first appeal to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals the decision of the Federal District Court was reversed due to issues not applicable here. 46 F.2d 417. In both trials the defendant called upon his wife to testify on his behalf and she was excluded
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Law United States
Case Brief Saenz v Roe (1999) 1. Facts The facts of the Saenz V Roe case is that in 1992 the state of California wanted to change the Aid to Families with Dependent Children Program by setting a limit to new residents. By having this approved by the Secretary of Health and Human Services and having the Federal District Court implement it‚ there would a large number of new residents who would be treated unequally. By the time it became into law on April 1‚ 1997 a class action was filed to challenge
Premium United States Law Supreme Court of the United States
COMES NOW Defendants‚ Shingua Tire Co. Ltd. (“Shingua Tire”)‚ by and through undersigned counsel‚ and hereby moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2) and states as follows: INTRODUCTION The Cause at hand represents a negligence claim against Shingua Tire. Plaintiff further alleges that Shingua Tire assumed a duty to the employees of its subsidiary Shingua Tire Illinois and failed to exercise reasonable care in rendering services
Premium Contract Tort Contract law
Case Title: Regina v. G and another (Appellants) (On Appeal form the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)) Citation: [2003] UKHL 50 Procedural History (PH): The appellants were charged on 22nd August 2000; without lawful excuse damaged by fire; commercial premises and being reckless as to whether such property would be damaged. The appellants stood trial before Judge Maher in March 2001. The appellants’ case at trial was that they expected the fire to extinguish itself on the concrete
Premium Mind Criminal law Mens rea
Michael Eubanks of Canadian Tire Corporation (CTC) is in charge of the implementation of a business intelligence (BI) system for the company. This implementation began in 2003 and was to be completed in 2005. In 2006‚ the project is only in the 2nd of 3 phases. He is now faced with a problem. The implementation is going much slower than he anticipated. His goal is to implement BI as soon as possible‚ so what does he need to do so that he can reach this goal? In order to reach his goal‚ there are
Premium Data management Business intelligence
Case Brief Summary: Marbury v. Madison Robert L. Broadwater PAD 525 Strayer University Dr. O’Neal July 09‚ 2012 Summary of Marbury v. Madison‚ 5 U.S. 137‚ 1 Cranch 137‚ 2 L. Ed. 60 (1803). Facts The incumbent president Federalist John Adams was defeat in the presidential election by Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson. The day before leaving office‚ President John Adams named forty-two justices of the peace and sixteen new circuit court justices for the District of Columbia. This was
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Marbury v. Madison United States Constitution
Gilford Motor Co V S Horne(1933) Horne was appointed Managing Director Gilford Motor Co 6-year term. He appointed by a written agreement says he will not solicit customers for their own purposes and whether he is a general manager or after he left. In order to avoid the effect of the agreement‚ Horne left Gilford Motor Co. and started his own company. Johnson’s company provides car accessories of Gilford Motor Co’s car in a weaken price and the shareholder of Gilford Motor being his associate in
Premium Subsidiary Subsidiary Corporation
In Stevenson‚ Jacque & Co. v. McLean ‚ held that the initial communication was only asking for information‚ and it was not a counter-offer. There was no effort here to institute new clauses into the contract. As per above case‚ Palm Tree did not attempt to introduce new terms into the contract and it was a mere request for information not a counter-offer. Belton responded as an acknowledge receipt and packed twenty Fryers into its delivery truck for Palm Tree. Belton’s action was supported that
Premium Contract Contract
Woo‚ 2009)‚ Green Rubber Global (GRG) was established around the invention of an environmentally friendly reactant and process to recycle rubber (refer to appendix 1). DeLink‚ the reactant‚ can be used to break down vulcanized rubber and return it to a workable state able to be reused as an alternative to virgin or synthetic rubber. Branded as Green Rubber‚ GRG’s product has wider applications than other rubber recycling products. Rising prices and shortages of natural rubber‚ global environmental
Premium Recycling Tire Polymer
MARVIN V. MARVIN Citation. 18 Cal. 3d 660‚557 P.2d 106‚134 Cal. Rptr. 815‚1976 Cal. Brief Fact Summary. Plaintiff and defendant lived in a nonmarital relationship‚ with an oral agreement to share equally all property accumulated. Upon dissolution of their relationship‚ plaintiff brought suit to enforce the oral agreement. Synopsis of Rule of Law. The California court found that partners in nonmarital relationships may bring claims for property division based on both express and implied contracts
Premium Common law Contract Law