Discussion Questions 1. Did the property appraiser do anything wrong? His response: “I did not lean on the county … I have done absolutely nothing wrong.” The property appraiser was involved with the county when he decided that he wanted to sell his property to the county. The property appraiser felt that the county should buy his “destroyed” property since the events of the 2004 hurricanes were responsible for the damaged. To some extent, the property appraiser was wrong about thinking that he can skip the process of facing a law suit about the damage and expecting that the county attorney will help him get the county to buy his property just because the property appraiser had a strong relationship with the county attorney. In addition, the property appraiser was wrong into thinking that he was entitled to special privileges because of the friendship he had with the county attorney. The property appraiser was trying to convince the county commission, the county attorney and the county administrator that his idea on requesting the county to buy his property was the best thing that the county can do since …show more content…
The county attorney and the county administrator should provide a full description of their activities to the county commission. The county commission was confident that their county attorney and the county administrator were not going to disappoint him since the county usually purchases property for flood control. Because of the issue of PA’s deal, the county commission should work more than ever with the county attorney and the county administrator. In order for the commission to gain the public trust and confidence in county government, firing the county attorney and the county administrator, who were involved with the PA’s deal, would be the best option for the public so they can see that the county treats its citizens and public employees with respect and
House v. Bell, 547 U.S. 518 (2006), is a United States Supreme Court case, which originated out of a Tennessee trial court murder conviction and death sentence (Neubauer & Fradella, 2008). The case started with the murder of Carolyn Muncey late on the night of July 14, 1985, or in the early morning hours of July 15, 1985. Muncey disappeared from her home, and was found dead the next day, with her body having been dumped down an embankment and covered with brush and limbs. The defendant, Paul Gregory House, was seen in the area of the body dump site, on July 15, 1985, carrying a black rag, and reportedly coming up the embankment, in the area where Muncey’s body was later located (House v. Bell, 2006). Evidence collected from the body of
The case comes from the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine. The parties involved were David and Katherine Graves and S.E. Downey Registered Land Surveyor, P.A. S.E. Downey is owned by Stephen Downey, a registered land surveyor and shareholder of the company. His son, Patrick, is an employee who helped on the Graves’ home project, under the supervision of his father.
Vincent Morgan is a police officer in Little Rock, Arkansas who stopped Vivian Rogers for a cracked tail light. She was asked for car insurance, but she did not have it. Morgan called a tow truck, then he cancelled it because he chose to follow her home in the police vehicle. Morgan followed Rogers in the house, and he told her that he will let her off the hook for a favor. Next, Morgan began kissing all over Rogers and told her to undress. Rogers started undressing and Morgan told her that she did not have to make love to him. Roger stopped taking off her clothes and Morgan finished stripping her down. He pushed her on the bed and had sex with her. Roger started yelling because
This case involved 2 parties, Tom Gentry and John Marsh. These two where in a partnership with each other and they were involved in buying and selling horses. They would buy horses then sell the babies for profit and also just sell the horse as well at many types of auctions. In November 1976 Marsh and Gentry bought these two horses together called Champagne Woman and Excitable lady. In 1978 Marsh and Gentry auctioned off Champagne Lady and Gentry used an anonymous bidder so Marsh wouldn’t find out that he used one to acquire Champagne Lady without telling Marsh. There was a fiduciary relationship between them and he broke it by not telling him because it can alter their profits because of this. When Gentry was supposed to be selling Excitable Lady, he didn’t pay Marsh instead he just didn't tell him. So a couple years down the road, Marsh soon realizes that
Mrs. Derby went to the beauty shop owned by the couple to contact her estranged husband. She took with her a copy of a property settlement agreement drafted by her lawyer which provided for an equal division of most of their property. Both parties had employed attorneys. Although the separation agreement had been delivered to Mr. Derby's attorney the prior Thursday, Mr. Derby had not conferred with his attorney concerning its contents. Mrs. Derby called her husband into the parking lot where, after briefly discussing the agreement, the paragraph providing for equal division of the property was stricken and Mrs. Derby wrote in, "Husband agrees to relinquish his portion of property located at 1824 E. Ocean View Ave., and to sign ownership of property over to his wife at earliest possible date." Both then signed the agreement in the parking lot on the hood of a car. Mrs. Derby secured a deed conveying the Ocean View Avenue property to her, which Mr. Derby signed before a notary public at 4 p.m. that afternoon. Mr. Derby did not consult his attorney concerning the agreement or deed prior to their
1) Discuss 3 key points that Judge Toler communicated and whether or not you agree with her positions.
Sometimes banks and mortgage companies allow people with good credit to purchase property priced higher than its appraised value. For example, a single female with a good job and good credit was allowed to pay over forty thousand dollars more than the appraised value of the house she bought. Two years later she lost her job and immediately refinanced her mortgage loan for a lower interest rate and payment. A ye...
Rock County Sheriff Bob Spoden fired 27 year-old John K. Housinga a former probationary corrections officer after an internal investigation uncovered an inappropriate relationship between him and the inmate. Any kind of sexual contact between officers and inmates regardless of consent is against the law. The ethical implication of Housinga’s behaviors is that he was expected to be professional in all his actions. Prison and jail is for to help rehabilitate inmates to become law abiding citizens, but this can’t be achieved if correctional officers behave unlawfully themselves. I think that the officer partook in this behavior possibly as a way to blackmail the inmate or because they were in a relationship with each other. The officer’s behavior can affect the corrections system in that the environment for the inmate and for the staff is not safe anymore. It is important to prioritize the best interest of inmates, since they might not be able to advocate for themselves. (Dupre’,
Dan Locallo is a very contradicting man. When he began his career as a prosecutor he was anything but polite to the defense lawyers. Locallo himself describes himself as “kind of an asshole” towards defense lawyers (Courtroom 302, 59). During his time as a prosecutor, Dan Locallo became intrigued by the opportunity to become a judge. When Steve Bogira asked Locallo why he wanted to become a judge, his reply seemed simple. Locallo claimed that he never wanted to become a judge because of a “power-trip” he does claim that “the power of attraction was a great influence” (Courtroom 302, 59). However, Locallo admits that the real reason why he wanted to become a judge was because he would have the “ability to make decisions, to do justice” (Courtroom 302, 59). As a judge, Locallo seems to express three different personalities, which tend to change depending on the current case at hand. His personalities are being compassionate judge, being an understanding judge, or being a hard-nose tough judge. Each of these personalities are not only determined by the case, but also by whether Locallo will profit on the long run; whether or not he will get reelected as a circuit judge at the end of his term.
My father started, owned and operated a tire business there for 45 years. During the latter years, he depended strictly on out of town business, because the locals prevented county vehicles, school vehicles, and any other county business to be done there. Nevertheless, the business did very well. In 1993, my father had double knee replacement surgery. The business fell behind a few payments on a mortgage loan from a local bank. My father had done business with that bank since 1951. After very few months, the bank began foreclosure proceedings. My father immediately sold a large inventory of tires, raised $10,000. He offered the bank the $10,000 to pay the arrearage plus a few payments in advance to show good faith. Every possible attempt was made to satisfy the bank, but everything was turned down except the $50,000 required to pay the loan off in full.
i was made to feel that i had burdened them with an unwanted task. the problem is that the atmosphere does not yet exist… in which an honest police officer can act… without fear of ridicule or reprisal from fellow officers. Police corruption cannot exist unless it is at least tolerated… at higher levels in the department. therefore, the most important result that can come from these hearings… is a conviction by police officers that the department will change. in order to ensure this… an independent, permanent investigative body… dealing with police corruption, like the commissio, is
Based on the information provided in chapter 7 and the information provided in the case, I would say that the owner of AAA Landscaping did not do a good job with handling the situation with Stu Murphy. In the case, it states that Stu had heard about AAA Landscaping through word of mouth advertising from some of his neighbors in his subdivision. He decided to hire AAA to landscape his yard and it was a $1200 service. The landscapers came out and redid the sod in the front yard and trimmed up bushes in Mr. Murphy's yard. The week after AAA did Stu's yard, they received a call from Stu and he let them know that there was unfinished work. Because AAA was tied up in other jobs the owner was not able to send anyone out until later on in the week. The next day Stu called again because the job was still not finished and the owner did not get around to calling Stu back. This went on for another week and finally the owner sent out someone to
Illinois and most notably Chicago are best known for their corrupt public officials. From the days of Cermak and the Daley political machine, corruption has become second nature to these “public servants”. From rigging elections to accepting ‘dirty’ donations to the alderman’s campaigns, corruption can be found from the very top of the political layer, down to the lowest government position. Those involved in the corruption have benefited greatly from their dirty deeds. Public residents aren’t directly aware of this corruption since they aren’t public officials, but most can attest to corruption when it involves the local police officers and the exploitation of the public.