Summarize the relevant facts of the case. The relevant facts of Echazabal v. Chevron USA are as follows. Mr. Echnazabal had been working at Chevron USA refinery since 1972 till 1996 until the events presented in the case unfolded. He was employed by independent maintenance contractors for the refinery and worked in the coker unit of the refinery. In 1992‚ when a job opening was posted by Chevron in the same coker unit as that of where Mr. Echnazabal worked‚ he applied for the position to be directly
Premium Appeal Standard Oil Chevron Corporation
The question before the Supreme Court concerning the Young v. UPS. Does the Pregnancy Discrimination Act require an employer to provide the same work accommodations to an employee with pregnancy-related work limitations as to employees with similar‚ but non-pregnancy related‚ work limitation? (http://www.oyez.org/cases) Samuel Bagenstos on behalf of the petitioner argued that UPS violated the second clause of the PDA. To his understanding the second clause means an employee seeking accommodation
Premium Pregnancy Abortion Human rights
State v. Evans‚ 671 N.W. 2d 720 (Iowa‚ 2003) In the late 1990’s Rebecca Arnold was attending Scott County Community College for nursing. While attending college Arnold encountered Hubert Evans‚ a published photographer with a foot fetish. It was during this random interaction that Evans asked Arnold to photograph her feet‚ Arnold declined. Evans had even told Arnold that he helped other women‚ whose pictures he had taken become “big models”. At some point in 1998‚ Evans obtained Arnold’s telephone
Premium Abuse Iowa Harassment
WrItIng effectIve rePorts 4.1 Preparing policy briefs 4 .1 4.2 More reporting formats 4.3 Writing effectively Lesson 4.1: Preparing policy briefs 4 .1 Learning objectives At the end of this lesson‚ you will be able to: identify two types of policy briefs (advocacy and objective); describe the characteristics of a policy brief; describe the structure and contents of a policy brief; and conceptualize a policy brief about a food security issue. Introduction In this
Premium Policy Report Food
Case Brief GATOR.COM CORP. V. L.L. BEAN‚ INC. 341 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2003) (1) Facts: March 2001‚ L.L. Bean’s corporate counsel mailed Gator a cease and desist letter requesting that Gator stop its pop-up windows from appearing when customers visited their website. Gator refused to change its practices‚ and instead filed a lawsuit in federal district court in California seeking a declaratory judgment. L.L. Bean filed a motion to dismiss the case for lack of personal jurisdiction. In November
Premium Jury Court Appeal
another point which the authors addressed in the article. In Turp v. Canada (2012)‚ the respondent (Canada) was brought up on charges for opting out of the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act (KPIA) (2012). The act was put in place as a measure to ensure Canada meet its targets under the Kyoto Protocol. However the Canadian government withdrew from the KPIA‚ and was subsequently brought to federal court. The court dismissed the case without cost‚ as they found the government’s reasoning for opting
Premium Management Globalization Strategic management
The Brown v. Board of Education case is landmark in the history of the United States society and the judiciary system (Hartung). It drastically affected the education systems‚ the civil rights movements‚ and is known as one of the first cases to acknowledge social science results. The Brown v. Board of Education case took place over sixty years ago‚ and its affects continue to influence many aspects of today’s society‚ and more specifically today’s education systems. Although the Brown case had many
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Brown v. Board of Education Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Park Min-jung (20080534) Fact : On June 9‚ 1974‚ Jerome Bourque(Plaintiff) was playing second base on a softball game. Duplechin(Defendant)‚ a member of the opposing team had hit the ball and advanced to first base. After his teammate hit the ball‚ to avoid double play Duplechin ran at full speed into Bourque. As Duplechin ran into Bourque‚ he brought his left arm up under Bourque’s chin. Plaintiff Bourque filed this suit to recover damages for personal injuries received in the collision.
Premium Tort Common law Tort law
Flagiello Case Brief Type of Court - Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Facts of the Case - Mrs. Flagiello was injured due to negligence while staying at the hospital - Mrs. Flagiello and her husband want compensation for time spent in hospital‚ loss of potential earnings‚ and added medical expense - Hospital was a charitable organization Legal Issues in the Case - Does charity grant the hospital immunity from such cases? - What was lost during the extra time spent in the hospital? - Was
Premium Tort Tort law Law
testimony of his co-defendant‚ John Bryant‚ Jr.‚ to be considered against him; (5) that the Court erred in permitting the jury to separate overnight on the last day of the trial; and (6) that there were certain erroneous instructions. (Law Justia: State v. Mouzon (1957)‚ n.d.) Holding
Premium Crime Murder Capital punishment