1. Caption and Procedural History Marbury v. Madison‚ Supreme Court of the United States‚ 1803 Justice Marshall wrote the majority opinion; he was joined by Paterson‚ Chase‚ and Washington. Justice Cushing and Moore did not participate. This case was originally tried in the Supreme Court of the Unites States. Marbury requested the Supreme the Court issue a writ of mandamus to compel James Madison to deliver the commissions issued by former President John Adams. 2. Facts Just before finishing
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Marbury v. Madison
Killgore Knight 12 February 2015 Homework Assignment #3 EEOC v Target Corporation 1) What were the legal issues in this case? What did the appeals court decide? The issue was whether there was disparate treatment based on race in the recruitment and hiring process at Target. The court also considered the issue of whether the employer’s failure to retain resumes and interview forms violated Title VII’s record retention requirements. The district court granted summary judgment to Target on both
Premium Employment Race African American
U.S. v. Lopez 514 U.S. 549 (1995)‚ Vote of 5 to 4‚ Rehnquist for the court. Congress in 1990 enacted the Gun-Free School Zone Act‚ making it a federal offence to possess a firearm in a school zone. Congress relied on the authority of the Commerce Clause of the Constitution to justify passage of legislation as a way of stemming the rising tide of gun related incidents in public schools. In 1992 Alfonso Lopez‚ Jr. was a senior at Edison High School in San Antonio‚ Texas. Acting on an anonymous
Premium Supreme Court of the United States Commerce Clause United States Congress
Period 4 Civics and economics honors Roe v. Wade court case “No woman can call herself free who does not have control over her own body.” – Margaret Sanger. No issue in comparison to the women’s rights movement has aroused such passion‚ conflict‚ and controversy as much as the right to an abortion. Roe v. Wade is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion that has prompted an across the nation debate that continues today about the extension of an abortion’s
Premium Abortion Roe v. Wade Pregnancy
On June 29‚ 2009‚ the last day of the United States Supreme Court’s 2008–09 term‚ the Court rendered the much anticipated decision in Ricci v. DeStefano‚ 129 S. Ct. 2658‚ 174 L. Ed. 2d 490 (2009). Ricci was quickly dubbed the “white firefighter’s case” by many‚ however‚ the case involved much more than the firefighters’ asserted right to a promotion. Ricci involved a promotional examination administered by New Haven‚ Connecticut to members of the New Haven Fire Department to identify those applicants
Premium United States Democratic Party Barack Obama
Case Brief: TRANSAMERICA OIL CORPORATION v. LYNES‚ INC and Baker Internat’l Corporation Procedural history The plaintiff purchaser (Transamerica Oil Corporation) brought action to recover damages resulting from defendant sellers’ (Lynes‚ Inc) breach of an express warranty under Kansas Uniform Commercial Code. The U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas awarded damages to the purchaser. The sellers appealed. Facts Harold Brown‚ president of Transameria‚ saw defendants’ advertisement
Premium Contract Appeal Law
You be the Judge #3 Deborah Andriaccio D’Youville College Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of LAW 303V Judge Thomas Rebhan June 6‚ 2014 Kashin V. Kent 457 F.3d 1033‚ 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 20496 United States Court of Appeals for The Ninth Circuit‚ 2006 Scope of employment refers to a person actively involved in an employment task at a particular time. It usually becomes an issue when an accident occurs‚ which is required to make
Premium Employment Supreme Court of the United States United States
Abstract In the case of White v. Gibbs‚ the plaintiff‚ Mrs. Debbie White‚ sued O’Malley’s Tavern alongside Patrick Gibbs. Gibbs served as bartender at the tavern during the night in question. Mrs. White seeks settlement under the state of Indiana’s Dram Shop Act. Under the Dram Shop Act‚ a bartender assumes liability to any persons injured who were served alcohol while exhibiting obvious signs of intoxication (Todd‚ 1986). Since the two parties reside in different states‚ the case was brought to
Premium Civil procedure Plaintiff United States
Incompatibilism v. Compatibilism There are two prevailing incompatibilist views concerning free will‚ hard Determinism or Libertarianism. The former asserts that if determinism is true‚ then free will is nonexistent and humans are essentially robots following a path determined for us from our past and natural laws. The latter denies that determinism is true and thus appears to introduce randomness as an explanation to account for free will. Compatibilists claim that free will and determinism can
Premium Determinism Free will Causality
Assignment 2 Issue: Under the state’s tort law‚ does forgery occur when an individual finds a check written out to cash‚ and was there any intent to injure or defraud. Rule of law: Under Section 30-236 of the state penal code defines forgery as “falsely making or altering any signature to‚ or any part of‚ any written purporting to have any legal efficacy with intent to injure or defraud.” Section 45-3-109d of the state Commercial Code provides that when a negotiable instrument is made out to cash
Premium First Amendment to the United States Constitution Law