Defendant. ) NOTICE OF APPEAL Notice is hereby given that Noel Nonesuch hereby appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Middle Circuit from the final judgment entered in this action on the 2nd day of January, 2014. Filed: January 4, 2014 _________________________________ Attorney for Noel Nonesuch, Plaintiff (NOTE: The appeal is pending before the United States Circuit Court for the Middle Circuit. The docket number assigned to this case on appeal is: 14-12)
Summary The Ward versus Polite case came to the Sixth Circuit United States Court of Appeals in 2011. The appellate case results from the 2010 lawsuit which the plaintiff lost. Both cases involve a self-professed Christian student, Julea Ward, in her third year of the Eastern Michigan University School Counseling program in 2009. As part of the program, all students are required to work at the university’s counseling center for 100 hours. Mrs. Ward was presented with a case file in which a student
Comparable Worth Comparable worth is a policy that women performing jobs judged to be equal on some measure of inherent worth should be paid the same as men, excepting allowable differences, such as seniority, merit, productive based pay plans, and other non-sex related factors. Objective is to eliminate use of the market in setting wages for jobs held by women (Milkovich, Newman, & Gerhart, 2014). This conflicts with the free market framework, in which businesses attempt to pay workers as meager
Overview In July 2003, Sheriff’s Deputy Todd Shanks of Multnomah County Oregon was performing a routine traffic stop on a vehicle driven by William Barrett. During this stop, Shanks arrested Barrett because of an outstanding warrant and then searched the car. A pressure-cooker found in the trunk was believed to be used in the making of methamphetamine. Barrett informed Shanks that the owner of the pressure-cooker was “Gunner Crapser,” and that he could be found at the Econolodge Motel in a room registered
Pollan essay ("Why Mow? . . .) 1] What is a "lawn dissident"? Dissident described in a dictionary is someone that actively challenges rules or doctrine. Lawn dissident in this article is a person who is challenging the policies that everyone has to have the same looking lawn just because someone of the authority says that thats the way it supposed to be. 2] What do you think of the father's response to the neighbor who asked (on behalf of the community) that he mow his lawn? What did he do, and
The United States has two types of court systems. One of those court systems is the federal court system. There are three tiers in the federal court system. The first and lowest tier is the District Court, the middle tier is the Court of Appeals, and the last and highest tier is the U.S. Supreme Court. The United States District Court is also the general trial courts of the federal court system. They have the authority to deal with all cases, both civil and criminal. In a trial court, the district
communications or actual attacks upon his wife during the pendency of the divorce proceedings" (United 1). Under Texas law, unbeknownst to Mr. Emerson, the possession of a firearm during the time period of the restraining order constituted a direct violation of the restraining order, and Mr. Emerson was indicted on charges of such violation. District Court Analysis Mr. Emerson was indicted in the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas, San Angelo Division, on charges of violation of the
HIERARCHY OF THE UNITED STATES DUAL COURT SYSTEM In United States, there is a dual court system. The dual court system is divided into Federal Courts and State Courts. Each hears different type of cases; neither is completely different of the other. The Constitution of the United States gives powers to the federal courts and reserves the rest for the state. FEDERAL COURTS SYSTEM The Federal Courts system handles legal issues expressly. Federal Courts make decisions which involve the issues of U
In 1975, the United State Supreme Court held that state law could provide students a property interest in their education, but forty years later and courts remain uncertain of when such an interest exists. In Goss v. Lopez, the United States Supreme Court extended due process protections to a group of high school students in Ohio. The Court determined that Ohio state law provided the high school students a property interest in their continued enrollment at the school, and that such an interest
that the blockage would occur, nor was he instructed as to how to prevent the blockage. Procedural History: Plaintiff website operator, KinderStart.com filed a complaint against Defendant Google, alleging nine claims for relief: violation of the right to free speech under the United States and California Constitutions; attempted monopolization in violation of the Sherman Act; monopolization in violation of the Sherman Act; violations of the Communications Act, unfair competition under California
legal system. However, a number of recent cases in the United States have sparked a debate on the issue, the most famous one being the “hot coffee lawsuit”1. In 1994, Stella Liebeck bought coffee at a McDonald’s restaurant, spilt it, and was severely burnt. She sued the McDonald’s company, received $160,000 in compensatory damages, and $2.9 million in punitive damages. A judge then reduced the punitive damages to $480,000. The final out-of-court settlement was of approximately $500,000. For many, this
prescribed period is called the “statute of limitation” and varies from state to state. Once the injured person has established that negligence led to injury, the court calculates the monetary damages that will be paid in compensation. Damages take into account both actual economic loss such as lost income and cost of future medical care, as well as noneconomic losses, such as pain and suffering. Physicians practicing in the United States generally carry medical malpractice insurance to protect themselves
instance where one claims these achievements without the proper experience to claim afoot these acclaimed respects from service to the country. This scenario was enacted and revealed through the case of United States v. Alvarez where Xavier Alvarez was deemed in violation of the Stolen Valor Act (2005) for the events that occurred at a board meeting between two water districts where Alvarez spoke. The Stolen Valor Act was meant to protect those who had served in the United States Military from having
In this Whistleblower Case Cecilia Guardiola, a former employee of Renown Health filed a lawsuit under the False Claims Act against Renown Health on June 1, 2012. The plaintiff alleged that fraudulent Medicare claims have been submitted by Renown Health for short stay inpatient claims that should have been outpatient claims. The original complaint that was filed has been seal according to order at the request of the plaintiff (Health, 2014). According to information from case Guardiola was hired
one of the most important cases would be Pretty v the United Kingdom [2002] where Diane Pretty was suffering from motor neurone disease, a degenerative disease affecting the muscles, for which there was no cure. Due to this she wanted to commit suicide, but she was prevented by her disease from taking such a step without assistance. It is however a crime to assist another to commit suicide under English law. She took her case to European Court of Human rights on the bases that it was for the individual
Federal vs. State The United States of America was founded on a belief that every citizen should have an equal opportunity and voice in the matters of the laws of the land they live in. A blueprint that assists in that ideal, is the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution has the principles of limited government and federalist standards to give citizens a part in influencing the lives of Americans. Federalism is a systematic way for the United States to separate and divide the authority
The power of executive privilege has been extremely controversial since basically the beginning of the United States as a democratic government. Many saw this power come into a greater public focus particularly during the Nixon presidency and the infamous Watergate Scandal, but the theory and use of executive privilege existed long before Nixon. As in true American fashion, some argue in favor of executive privilege, while others view it in a more negative light. The intense controversy is what makes
example of how state responsibility can be important to international organization. The Secretary – General of the UN sent a letter to the President of the International Court of Justice in December of 1948. (Trygve 1948) The Secretary- General wanted the International Court of Justice to give their advisory opinion on a legal question that the General Assembly had. They wanted to know that if an agent of the UN got injured while performing their duties involving the responsibility of state does the UN
system in the United States, which are the Federal and the States. In the article,” Federal vs. State courts-Key Differences” Federal judicial center stated that federal courts recognized under the U.S Constitution to decide to quarrel involving the Constitution and laws that passed by the Congress. While State courts recognized by a state within local courts such as cities, counties, and municipalities. Although federal law is effective throughout the United States, different states have different
Case: Gunn v. Minton, 133 S. Ct. 1059 – Supreme Court (2013) This is a federal court case that takes place in the Supreme Court of the United States. It is a civil case, brought to the Texas State Court, appealed by the plaintiff from the trial court decision. This case was argued on January 16, 2013 and resolved on January 20, 2013. Issue: Does the Federal Court have jurisdiction of an attorney malpractice lawsuit (alleging the attorney did not represent plaintiff correctly) when the original