Today the land taken in the City of New London lies empty, as a result of the failing plans the NLDC constructed to economically revitalize New London. The Kelo v. City of New London case faced tremendous backlash because it allowed the federal government to seize anyone's property for supposed economic improvement rather than actual public use. This unintended backlash was so strong causing a majority of states to pass laws that were aimed at nullifying Kelo-style takings of private property. Richard Palmer, one of the state supreme court justices who voted with the majority, later apologized to Susette Kelo, telling her he “would have voted differently” had he known what would happen. (Somin).…
Due to the facts found by Mr. Robinson and the hearing outcome, he ordered that Mr. Sterne be restore to his original position and rank, and be compensated for any back pay and benefits that he had lost since his demotion. Additionally, Robinson found that there was irregularities with how the discipline was handed out and there was no due process and progressive discipline before demotion and loss of pay, thus Sterne was discriminated against an was due his return to his past position with back pay. This case again shows, specific issues with retaliation being taken against subordinates without due process and could actual fall into a Title VII Civil Rights Act case, but the District of Columbia has a Civil Process for adjudicating employee…
Case name: Rankin v. McPherson, 483 U.S. 378 (1987) Facts: Ardith McPherson was appointed a deputy in the Constable’s office of Harris County, Texas, on January 12, 1981. Her duties were only clerical. On March 30, 1981, McPherson discussed with her boyfriend, and fellow employee, a report about an attempt to assassinate the President of the United States. She made the remark “If they go for him again, I hope they get him”. Her remark was reported to Constable Rankin, who fired McPherson, even though she told him she did not mean anything by it.…
Case: Ewing v. California, 583 U.S. 11 (2003) — Facts: George Ewing walked into a pro shop of a Los Angeles County golf course where he concealed and stole three golf clubs priced at $399 a piece. Aside from this incident, Ewing had several prior convictions, four of which were serious, violent, and/or felonious. In this case, Ewing was convicted of felony grand theft and sentenced to 25 years to life under California’s three-strike law. Procedural History: the California Court of Appeal and the Second Appellate District affirmed the trial court’s ruling. The State Supreme Court denied review, and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari, as well as upheld the decisions of the lower courts.…
The actuality of the case of State v. Stewart consist of a variety of mental, physical and emotional abuse in which Peggy Stewart had been “pushed” in her own mind to kill her husband to escape from his toxic and cruel behavior. As a result, the facts of the case are a wide variety that contributed to Peggy’s “imminent danger” state of mind when deciding whether her actions were truly self-defense. These include the abuse at hand, physiological trauma that Peggy experienced, and professional opinions about Peggy’s actions. An important factor of the case is Peggy Stewart’s significant abuse by her husband, Mike. Additionally, Mike’s abuse was not only to Peggy; but also to her daughter, Carla.…
One of the most controversial cases in American History was the case of Dred Scott versus Sanford. Dred Scott was a slave who lived with his owner, Doctor John Emerson in the free state of Illinois. Dred Scott and his wife, Harriet, both had lived in a free state for a decade, and they decided to file for emancipation. Commonly, slaves would sue for their freedom if they had live in free territory for a long period of time. Their cases were not at first acknowledged because of the outbreak of cholera and backed up court schedules but eventually their case was heard, and the Scotts won favor.…
In the Kelo v. New London court case, Suzette Kelo and eight petitioners opposed a eminent domain taking “projected to create in excess of 1,000 jobs, to increase tax and other revenues, and to revitalize an economically distressed city” (“Kelo” 472). Suzette Kelo claimed the “extensive improvements” that she had made on her house justified her ability to block this development plan (476). Others claimed that their “investment properties,” because they were not “blighted or otherwise in poor condition,” could not be taken by the government (476). Do Kelo’s and the other defendants’ claim to their property through proper maintenance and labor supersede the governments right to repossess the properties for economic development?…
Case: Katzenbach v. Grant 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46756 *; 2005 WL 1378976 Facts: The Plaintiffs, Katzenbach and Osuna filed a lawsuit against Defendant Grant over a film and book rights. Grant owns a website called “thenightexposed” (www.thenightexposed.net). The Plaintiffs claim that Grant caused problems with negotiations with Sony Pictures and the USA Network. Plaintiff further claims that Grant sent a letter calling Osuna book a fake and made other defamatory articulations about the Plaintiffs on his website.…
MOSHER V BENSON BACKGROUND: At the age of 17 Kyle Mosher purchased a car from Peter Benson. The motion before the court was to have the matter set aside due to the plaintiff being a minor. Mosher had requested that the contract be reversed since he was a minor at the time the car was purchased and further stated that the vehicle was not in roadworthy condition and therefore had to pay and excessive price for the vehicle. According to the British Columbia Infants Act Subsection 27 (a) An adult, who at the time he or she entered a contract was an infant, can reject the contract if (c) he or she gives, oral or written notice of rejection to another party to the contract within one year after reaching the age of majority.…
While studying the case R. v Hauser, it is clear to see why it is known to be one of the leading constitutional decisions in understanding the workings of Peace, order and good governments in relation to a power struggle of jurisdiction. The whole case surrounds the question on whether the Attorney General, or the Attorney General of Canada should have the power to control the prosecution under the Federal Narcotics Control Act. It is a battle for powers of jurisdiction in regards to the criminal code, and more so the Narcotics Control Act; (NCA), 1961. The Narcotics Act was once Canada’s national drug control statue prior to its repeal in 1996 where the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act took its place. The NCA upheld an international treaty which prohibited the production, and supply of specific drugs; normally narcotics, unless given a licence for specific…
Evan Miller has had a rough upbringing. He has had emotional abandonment from his alcoholic and drug abused mother, his abusive father and forced to be placed in multiple foster cares throughout his childhood. Miller is a prime example of an abandoned, troubled minor, whose true destiny has been destroyed due to these circumstances. The problems he has faced steered him to being depressed and unsatisfied, using drugs, alcohol and four suicide attempts to trying and fulfill the emptiness he has been feeling his entire life.…
Contracts are an integral part of society, having strong legal contractual principles gives confidence to consumers, investors and anyone who wishes to enter into a contract. Entering in a contract shows that in a primitive way that two parties are on the same page, however it is noted that a high proportion of litigation does actually stem from misunderstood contract (Duxbury (2011)).In this scenario Gary believes he has a valid contract with Mike and is disappointed to learn that Mike has sold on the Bike to Liz (third party). Using previous cases as precedent and analysing the conditions in which a contract is made, advice will be given to Gary on his legal position in regards to the contract and whether there is any suitable remedy that…
Issue Is Bill Smith shown consideration by the Master of Fair Weather? Is TransPacific shipping Co Ltd Legally liable to pay Smith the 50% premium for sailing back to New Zealand on the Fair Weather voyage? Law…
Creasey v Beechwood Creasey worked as the general manager of Welwyn Pty Ltd (Welwyn), which carried on the business of selling cars on premises owned by Beechwood Motors Ltd (Motors). Welwyn and Motors had common directors and shareholders, Ford and Seaman. Creasey was summarily dismissed by Selwyn and filed a claim for damages for unfair dismissal. Welwyn’s financial records indicated it was approaching insolvency and Creasey was informed that the company would likely cease trading soon. Motors took over the business of Welwyn and repaid Welwyn’s outstanding liabilities.…
Taylor v Caldwell (1863) 3B & S 826 Introduction The case of Taylor v Caldwell is a fundamental case in the area of frustration with regards to contract law. Taylor v Caldwell is an extremely important case, as Murray states, "frustration developed to alleviate harshness of absolute obligation rule". Frustration comes about in circumstances where the courts will discharge the parties of obligations under the contract, therefore meaning that the parties are not liable for any further obligations under the contract. Case Facts…