Ann. Section(s) 19-12-101‚ the "criminal attempt" statute‚ the trial court affirmed the juvenile court order and sentenced the girl to the Department of Youth development for an indefinite period. The issue in this case is to determine whether the defendant ’s action in this case constitute a "substantial step" toward the commission of second degree murder under the new statue. The "substantial step" issue has not yet been
Premium Appeal Appellate court Trial court
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
Class 3 Anti-trust Laws Nature and Purposes of the Antitrust Laws * Prohibits agreements and collective action that unreasonably restrain trade. [section1] * Prohibits monopolization and attempted monopolization [section 2] * Purpose is to preserve a competitive marketplace and protect consumer welfare. NCAA v. Board of Regents of University of Oklahoma * S.C. established an analytical framework for applying antitrust law to the sports industry. * The “competition itself”
Premium Major League Baseball Cartel Trust
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
(Nadel v. Burger King Corp.‚ 1997 Ohio App. LEXIS 2144) Source: Company Profiles and Directories;US Law Reviews and Journals‚ Combined;Federal & State Court Cases - After 1944‚ Combined;Newspaper Stories‚ Combined Papers Combined Source: Company Profiles and Directories;US Law Reviews and Journals‚ Combined;Federal & State Court Cases - After 1944‚ Combined;Newspaper Stories‚ Combined Papers Project ID: 7 of 8 DOCUMENTS CHRISTOPHER NADEL‚ by and through his next friend‚ BRENDA NADEL
Free Product liability
that the testator’s name be subscribed at the end of the will by some other person‚ in the testator’s presence and at his direction. In order to make a valid will‚ the testator must strictly comply with the provisions for formal execution. In this case there is no way of knowing that the decedent’s failure to sign was a mistake or not. DISPOSITION: The lower courts determination of invalidity is affirmed. COMMENTS: It is evident that the will was not signed by the decedent and in accordance
Premium Law Common law Sign
the warrant. REASONING/RATIONALE: The Maryland Supreme Court found that the warrant did not authorize a search of Garrison’s apartment and the police had no justification for making a warrantless entry into his premises; however that was not the case. The US Supreme Court found that the police reasonably believed that they were searching McWebb’s apartment and it was a mistake. The warrant was executed in a reasonable manner‚ despite the mix up. The police acted in the best of their ability and
Premium Miranda v. Arizona Constable Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
silence as evidence of guilt. Procedural History: Petitioner was convicted of murder and sentenced to 20 years. This was directly sent to the Texas State Court of Appeals who rejected the argument. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals took up the case and affirmed the same judgment. Issue: Was the petitioner’s Fifth Amendment right violated when prosecutor’s used his silence as evidence of guilt‚ when he was not in custody and had not had his Miranda rights read to him? Holding/Rule: No‚ because
Premium Question Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution Crime
02 Saving Part 1) * I am saving my money that I have been earing so that I can put it toward my college tuition. College tuition is very expensive so I need to start and save my money now. * I want to make this purchase because I plan on going to college after I graduate from high school. I plan on attending University of Miami. What I really want to be when I’m older is a lawyer and Miami has one of the best law programs in Florida. Since Miami is a private college‚ their tuition
Premium High school Education College
Briefing the Case Assignment In the renowned Supreme Court Case of Jackson vs. Birmingham Board of Education‚ the rule of law was held to be that retaliating against a person because he has complained of being discriminated on the grounds of sex falls under a branch of intentional sex discrimination‚ which is encompassed by Title IX‚ Education Amendments of 1972. This was an important case with respect to intentional sex discrimination and never before had such principle of law been enunciated
Premium Complaint Discrimination Pleading