Mr. Chung estimated that he started his lease at 1361 Newton Street‚ Los Angeles‚ CA somewhere in either in 2009 or 2010 from the Smith and Company and dealt specifically with the leases Representative Bill or AKA: William Weiss. He said he rented out a small storage space which was a 12’x12’ storage space where he stored props and extra vases at the extra storage space‚ which he rented out for space for cash at $50.00 per month and with a check for $25.00 month and would give him $25.00 in cash
Premium Money Balance sheet Investment
1. Can you (or Mr. Yourprop’s supervisor) search Yourprop’s personal vehicle currently parked in the Company parking lot for digital evidence? Support your answer. a. Pursuant to the 4th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution‚ Mr. Yourprop and all other employees have a reasonable expectation of privacy which would prevent me and his supervisor from freely searching his vehicle. The easiest and most efficient way that would prevent questions of immiscibility in court and protect the company from legal
Premium United States Constitution Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution Police
Page 1 Case Name: Saelman v. Hill Between Jacques Saelman and William Wuerch‚ plaintiffs‚ and Dennis Wayne Hill and Sylvia Ann Hill‚ defendants [2004] O.J. No. 2122 [2004] O.T.C. 440 20 R.P.R. (4th) 118 2004 CanLII 9176 131 A.C.W.S. (3d) 367 Court File No. 13526/00 Ontario Superior Court of Justice Kingston‚ Ontario Hackland J. Heard: April 5-8 and 13-16‚ 2004. Judgment: May 20‚ 2004. (47 paras.) Damages -- For torts -- Affecting property -- Real property -- Nuisance -- Inconvenience -Psychological
Premium Tort Law Pleading
Case Title: Regina v. G and another (Appellants) (On Appeal form the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)) Citation: [2003] UKHL 50 Procedural History (PH): The appellants were charged on 22nd August 2000; without lawful excuse damaged by fire; commercial premises and being reckless as to whether such property would be damaged. The appellants stood trial before Judge Maher in March 2001. The appellants’ case at trial was that they expected the fire to extinguish itself on the concrete
Premium Mind Criminal law Mens rea
On Thursday‚ leaders of ultra-Orthodox political parties panned Supreme Court Justice Miriam Naor’s decision to uphold a ruling that allowed Tel Aviv supermarkets to remain open on Shabbat and other Jewish days of the rest. Naor’s has been slammed by the leaders of the religious right-wing parties during her time as a justice‚ which she vacated after this final ruling. Shas leader and Interior Minister Aryeh Deri called the decision " a coup" and Health Minister and leader of the United Torah Judaism
Premium Israel Judaism Religion
1. Title and Citation: Dennis v. united States 341 U.S. 494 71 S. CT. 857 (1951) 2. Facts of the Case: a. The Smith Act made it a criminal offense to knowingly or willfully advocate the overthrowing of any government in the United States by force or to attempt to commit or conspire to commit the crime the same. The Petitioners were brought up on charges under the Act for allegedly willfully and knowingly conspiring to organize as the Communist Party of the United States‚ a group whose members advocated
Premium United States Cold War World War II
BURWELL V. HOBBY LOBBY‚ INC. 134 S. Ct 2751 (US 2014) SUPREME COURT OF UNITED STATES Facts: Hobby Lobby is a family owned arts and crafts store that runs on Christian principles. The companies statement of purpose is “honoring the Lord in all [they] do by operating the company in a manner consistent with Biblical principles.” The family does not believe in the use of contraception but under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)‚ the company is required to offer a minimum coverage
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States
The Dustin Soldano v. Howard O’Daniels case models the common dispute between negligence and a party’s responsibility in an event. Likewise‚ chapter 1 of the Legal Environment textbook features Kuehn v. Pub Zone‚ a case that demonstrates a different scenario but the same battle of negligence and liability. The commonalities between the two cases support one another in the demonstration of the judges’ decisions as well as contribute to later common law. In the beginning of chapter 1‚ Beatty asks
Premium Law Tort law Tort
I. THE POLITICS OF EQUALITY A. Guarantees of Civil Rights (Table 15-1‚ pg. 542) III. SLAVERY‚ SEGREGATION AND THE CONSTITUTION A. Slavery and the Constitution 1. Compromises in Article I (3/5‚ slave trade) 2. Article IV - Guaranteed return of escaped slaves to their owners 3. Slaves referred to as "person held to Service or Labour" in the Constitution 4. Dred Scott vs. Sandford (1857) - See pg. 543 Peter Blow -Dr. Emerson dies while
Premium United States American Civil War Slavery in the United States
Midterm Case Analysis: The Blast in Centralia No.5- A Mine Disaster No One Stopped Question 1 In 1941‚ Congress authorized that the United States Bureau of Mine to conduct inspections periodically through the mines. During the same year‚ Governor Green appointed Driscoll Scanlan to become the Illinois state mine inspector. Scanlan went right to work and began inspections in his district‚ where he concluded that Centralia No. 5 was the worse mine condition within the district. On February 7‚ 1942
Premium Coal Coal Coal mining