CASE BRIEF FOR THE WINDSOR V. STATE OF ALABAMA WINDSOR V. STATE OF ALABAMA 683 So. 2d 1021 (1994) Judicial History: Harvey Lee Windsor was convicted of capital murder under § 13-A-5-40 (a)(2)‚ Code of Alabama 1975. The jury unanimously recommended the death penalty and the trial court accepted the jury’s recommendation and sentenced the appellant to death by electrocution. Windsor then appealed the conviction and sentence to the Court of Criminal Appeals. Facts: Harvey Lee Windsor and Lavon Gunthrie
Premium Court Jury Supreme Court of the United States
IRAC Outline by Team A Shoshone Coca-Cola Bottling Company vs. Dolinski The defendant appealed the decision by the State of Nevada Trail Court which awarded the plaintiff money for his physical and emotional damages after the plaintiff purchased and consumed part of a Squirt soda which contained a dead mouse‚ hair and dung in the Squirt bottle. In order to hear this case‚ the state of Nevada adopted the doctrine of strict liability (Cheeseman‚ 2013 p. 110). The Supreme Court of Nevada awarded
Premium Law United States Tort
Legal Concepts in Business Managerial Settings LAW 531 January 13‚ 2014 Legal Concepts in Business Management Settings The case Team B chose to study and analyze is Beckman v Match.com. Mary Kay Beckman joined Match.com and dated another Match.com client‚ Wade Mitchell Ridley‚ for a short time. Following the break-up Ridley began harassing Beckman by sending threatening text messages. The harassment escalated to violence and resulted in Ridley attacking Beckman in
Premium Law Common law Civil procedure
Civil Appeal No. KCH-12B-14/4-2012 MALAYSIA IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AT KUCHING CIVIL APPEAL NO. KCH-12B-14/4-2012 5 BETWEEN (1) (2 CHAN WON LOONG (WN.KP.661002-06-5405) CHAN SOOK KIN (WN.KP.701211-06-5034) Both of No.22‚ Lo13477‚ Ground Floor‚ Block C Jalan Tun Razak 10 93450 Kuching‚ Sarawak. ... ... AND ... ... ... ... Appellants NG YAN LING (WN.KP.670924-13-6016) No.7‚ Taman Tapang Emas Jalan Sungai Tapang 15 93250 Kuching‚ Sarawak.
Premium Trial Appeal Law
Assignment – Week 3 – Esposito-Hilder vs. SFX case Jennifer Rhodes DeVry University – Keller Graduate School of Management MGMT 520 – Legal‚ Political and Ethical Dimensions of Business Professor William Dillon May 26‚ 2013 1) What is the most “jealousy” protected kind of speech‚ according to the court in this case? (3 points) Answer: According to the court in this case‚ the most jealousy protected speech is that which advances the free‚ uninhibited flow of ideas and opinions
Premium Pleading Complaint Civil procedure
Case Study I by ___________________________: Citation: Gerald K. Adams v Uno Restaurants‚ Inc Rhode Island State Court‚ 2002 794 A. 2nd District 489 Appeal: Gerald K. Adams v Uno Restaurants‚ Inc Rhode Island Supreme Court No. 2000-266 (KC 97 -1005) Facts: On May 20‚ 1996‚ the plaintiff‚ who had been employed by the defendant for several years‚ arrived for his nighttime line cooking shift at the defendant’s Warwick restaurant. Shortly‚ after his shift began‚ the plaintiff noticed
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Civil procedure Jury
The assumption standard does not meet modern pleading standards because it allows plaintiffs to present a claim that is missing an essential element of due process. An initial question is what are modern pleading standards? Pleadings standard in the modern era have become stricter and require plaintiffs to show more than they might have in the past. In two cases‚ Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly ‚ the Supreme Court expanded the scope of pleading requirements. The Supreme
Premium Pleading Plaintiff Supreme Court of the United States
Brief # 1-Circuit City Stores‚ Inc(Defendant) V. Mantor(Plantiff) Procedural History A year after Circuit City‚ Inc terminated Mantor’s employment he brought a civil action in state court alleging twelve causes of action. Circuit City petitioned the district court to compel arbirtration‚ and the distict court granted circuit citys motion to compel arbitration. Mantor appealed‚ argueing that the arbitration process was unforecable because it was unconsiable Issue Was the arbitration contract
Premium Contract Arbitration Civil procedure
Article Review LAW/421 January 21‚ 2014 Tamra Caputo University of Phoenix Material Article Review Format Guide MEMORANDUM UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX DATE: January 21‚ 2014 TO: RE: Motorola files new suit against Apple ("Motorola Files New Suit Against Apple"‚ 2012). ARTICLE SYNOPSIS In 2010 Motorola had filed a lawsuit against Apple claiming that they had Apple infringed on their patents. Their claim was that several of Apple products used Motorola technology
Premium Copyright Dispute resolution Injunction
1. Case Name‚ Citation‚ and Court Internet Solutions Corp. v. Marshall LEXIS 2826I (2008) The District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2. Key Facts A. Internet Solutions Corp. (ISC)‚ which operates employment recruiting and Internet advertising websites‚ has its principal place of business in Florida. B. Tabatha Marshall‚ a resident of the State of Washington‚ was sued by ISC for making false and defamatory statements on her website. C. Marshall filed a motion to dismiss asserting
Premium Appeal Civil procedure Jurisdiction