Your Name : Siyao Zhong Role Play Name : 67 Fishpond Lane Your Role : Seller of the House with Marlee. Person Playing Other Role : Steven and Valerie V‚ playing the buying $Results : 380‚000$ for house + 20‚000$ for birds This case presented me a huge impression since it was the first time we did case in groups‚ where as all the cases we did previously‚ including the sophisticated Riverside
Premium Jury Lawyer Law
Conduct Meetings Assessment task 2 Name of business: Dazzling Photography Description of business: Photography business specializing in: Weddings‚ Newborn photography‚ Family portraits and studio design. We also offer photo editing and collages. Number of employee’s in the workplace: 12 Meeting Purpose: A meeting to agree on where to go on the company business retreat (Melbourne‚ Noosa or Fiji) Organisational requirements Meeting minutes must be captured Meeting must start and finish on time Must
Premium Problem solving Controversy Meeting
Brief 3 Circuit City Stores‚ Inc. v Mantor Procedural History • Paul Mantor sues Circuit City Stores‚ Inc. alleging twelve causes of action. • State Court granted Circuit City’s motion to compel Arbitration. • Mantor appealed that the arbitration agreement was unenforceable due to it being unconscionable. Issue If the arbitration agreement between Circuit City Stores‚ Inc. and Paul Mantor was unconscionable? Facts • In 1995‚ Circuit City Stores‚ Inc. instituted an arbitration
Premium Civil procedure Appeal Contract
Fact Summary: Kevin Keays had been employed with Honda Canada for 14 years when he was fired. During his employment‚ Keays was diagnosed with choric fatigue syndrome and was granted disability leave for about two years. After the two years Keays returned to work‚ however Honda became concerned when Keays was continuously absent. Honda requested Keays visit with the organizations occupational medicine specialist to further diagnose his condition. Keays refused to abide with Hondas request and
Premium Automobile Civil procedure Law
Hector A. Vasquez Shoula Romano Horing MSM 517 20 August 2013 Leonard v. Pepsi Cola The Assigned case that I am to discuss is Leonard v. Pepsi Cola. In this paper I will discuss the facts of the case‚ the history‚ issues the court had to decide‚ the holding or the answer to the questions‚ the reasoning the court used to justify the decision‚ and finally the results and the judgment. The Facts is the Leonard sued Pepsi Co for refusing a formal demand to honor its offer. The history
Premium United States Civil procedure Plaintiff
Case Study Decision: Change In Circumstances Gagnon v. Coombs pRESENTED BY: SVETLANA SHEVCHENKO To recap this matter: Francis Gagnon and his wife executed powers of attorney (POA) appointing their daughter‚ Joan Coombs‚ as their agent. Later on‚ the document was revoked per their son’s request but Joan was not advised of this fact. In two months‚ after Mrs. Gagnon’s death‚ Mr. Gagnon signed an agreement selling the farm he owned in Shelburne‚ MS and informed Joan of the sale and
Premium Law United States Common law
Superior Court of New Jersey‚ Appellate Division. Karl KUEHN‚ Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Respondent‚ v. PUB ZONE‚ Defendant-Respondent/Cross-Appellant‚ and Maria Kerkoulas‚ Arm Supply Company‚ Inc.‚ and Anthony Zois‚ Defendants. Argued Oct. 8‚ 2003. Decided Nov. 24‚ 2003. Patron brought negligence action against tavern in connection with injuries sustained when members of motorcycle gang attacked patron in men ’s room. After jury returned $300‚000 verdict for patron‚ the Superior Court
Premium Jury Law Civil procedure
Denzel Hartley 04.14.2013 SPM 333 Facility Negligence/Crowd Management BOYER v. IOWA HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSN. The case against Iowa High School Athletic Association was created by Marian Boyer. Marian Boyer attended a basketball game Roosevelt Junior High School in Mason City‚ Iowa. Boyer‚ her husband and two other witnesses‚ Mr and Mrs Garland‚ sat together at the tow row bleachers. According to the case brief when the bleachers are not in use they are pushed
Premium Law United States Civil procedure
| JUDGMENT OF DIVORCE | Theresa Leary | 8/30/2011 | | | | Commonwealth of Massachusetts The Trial Court Division: Suffolk Probate and Family Court Department Docket No.________ JUDGMENT OF DIVORCE Patty Bean‚ Plaintiff v. David Bean‚ Defendant This cause came on for hearing on the Complaint and was heard on the 15th day of August‚ 2011‚ before Honorable John M. Smoot of the Suffolk County Probate and Family Court. Upon due consideration thereof‚ the Court finds that
Premium Law Appeal United States
Rick Richards‚ et ux. v. Commissioner Facts: The petitioners‚ Mr. Richards and Mrs. Richards‚ Issues: 1. Whether petitioner (both Mr. Richards and Mrs. Richards) conducted their writing or acting activities with the objective of making a profit within the meaning of §186? 2. Whether petitioners have substantiated the ordinary and necessary business expense of these activities? 3. Whether petitioners are entitled to carry forward a net operating loss from a prior tax year 4. Whether petitioners
Premium Law Legal terms Civil procedure