principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.” In Bowles v. Virginia Soapstone Co.‚ the judge ruled: “expert testimony is a useful and necessary adjunct to the administration of justice‚ and a capable expert can often throw much light upon dark places; but the force of expert testimony must‚ after all‚ in large measure depend upon the reasons that the witness is able to give for the opinions which he expresses.” In Bird v. Commonwealth‚ the court found: "All persons who practice a business
Premium Law Jury Evidence law
Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [1893] Q.B. 256 (C.A.) Facts The Defendants were a medical company named “Carbolic Smoke Ball”. Who manufactured and sold a product called the "smoke ball"‚ a cure for influenza and a number of other diseases. The company published advertisements in the Pall Mall Gazette and other newspapers on November 13‚ 1891‚ claiming that it would pay £100 to anyone who got sick with influenza after using its product three times a day for two weeks‚ according to the
Premium Contract Invitation to treat
Ermina Dedic Legal Brief 1 Name of Case: Dow Chemical Co. v United States. Court: U.S. Supreme Court Citation: 476 U.S. 227 (1986) Parties and their roles: Dow Chemical (Plaintiffs/Petitioner) and United States (Defendants/ Respondents) Facts: Dow Chemical operates a two-thousand-acre chemical plant at Midland‚ Michigan. The facility‚ with numerous buildings‚ conduits‚ and pipes‚ are visible from the air. Dow has maintained ground security at the
Premium United States Law Appeal
labeled the people who applied for the skilled and non skilled jobs. The rehire practices of the cannery should be fair and equal for all jobs. New policies should be put in place to resolve current issues with hiring practices. Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio In this situation at the cannery I feel that the hiring practices are discriminating. By using an agency to hire the skilled positions that is out of state‚ the cannery is excluding the local population from the skilled positions. There
Premium Employment Seattle
LEGAL ISSUE R. Williams Construction Company v. OSHRC is a case regarding the rules and regulations of OSHA verse the practices of a construction company. OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Act) is a government regulated organization that was created to ensure the safety of employees while on the job. The regulations of OSHA have been put in place to eliminate and/or reduce the number of on the job injuries and deaths. Therefore‚ legal issue of this case is whether or not the courts should
Premium Occupational safety and health Employment Construction
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
bidding in auctions (Hirby). In the case of Entores v Miles Far East Co‚ the courts held that the offer and the acceptance can be delivered via cyber communication such as telex instead of writing or face-to face methods. The formation of an contract generates as the acceptance is received. Therefore an electronic contract may be formed via emails‚ as long as all the necessary elements of a standard contract are established (Hill 2001). Postal
Premium Contract Contract law Contractual term
In a case Wagenheim v. Alexander Grant & Co the court ruled that Alexander Grant improperly divulged confidential information about their client‚ Consolidata Data Services‚ to other clients. Consolidata Data Services‚ an audit client of Alexander Grant performed payroll services for
Premium Finance Accountant Management
Hildreth v. Tidewater Equipment Co. Summary John Hildreth was the sole shareholder‚ director‚ and officer HCE‚ Inc‚ a corporation in New Jersey. HCE-NJ began to do business in Maryland in early 1997. According to the Maryland code‚ it is required for foreign corporations to register with the Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation before doing intrastate business in Maryland‚ and it is required to have a resident agent in Maryland. In February 1998‚ HCE-NJ rented equipment from Tidewater
Premium Corporation United States Virginia