38. Dale Anderson acted complicity with C Langstan when forcing Saratoga, Wyoming to ship waste via Rawlins to Casper. Dale Anderson acted complicity when forcing Rawlins to haul waste to Casper. 39. The illegal activities of Anderson and Langston are proximal and arguable the causation of the damages to the Plaintiff, and others. The damages to the Plaintiff includes, but are limited to defamation, wrongful terminations, and violation of good faith and fair dealing. 40. Elements of RICO were written in broad terms. To state a claim, a plaintiff must allege four elements: (1) conduct (2) of an enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) of racketeering activity.[5] Each element of a RICO claim requires additional analysis: an “enterprise” is marked …show more content…
The racket of using a position of power to force others to pay more for waste disposal so that your family makes more money, is no better then Organized Crime extorting business and …show more content…
The following is an analysis of the 1st Amendment to determine if tThis act was not Job required.he speech is protected: 1. Did the individual demonstrate that his or her speech address a matter or matters of public interest and concern? When Plaintiff informed the Director of the marriage relationship he was informing the director of a violation of law (nepotism), that allowed and caused additional violations of Law that endangered Human Health and the environment. Arguing that the Landfill endangered Human Health and the environment was difficult until the fire. The fire proves the argument of Plaintiff to be correct! This Act was not Job Required! When Plaintiff informed the City that C Langston was married to the Dale Anderson he spoke as a citizen in an attempts to curtail the continued damages being done by Defendants. This is a matter of public interest and concern, which violates the Law. How much more does a citizen required to do to stop the government from damaging the citizen than point out that they are violating the Law. Discussing the fact that C Langston does not archive emails as required by law is a covering damages done to the Plaintiff. 2. Did the individual demonstrate that his or her speech was a significant or motivating factor in the employer 's
...e constitution, but natural rights are. (Brennan 1). The government cannot prohibit ones expressive conduct due to the reactions society may hold. (Brennan 1). Due to the evidence that the majority opinion has, Johnson was inside his First Amendment rights.
Salvador Gomez is a teenager that helps the broken down the torn up even the poor.
Without corporate fees to replenished superfunds, there would not be enough money to do the critical job of cleaning up waste (Easton, 2014). Furthermore, Fortune 500 corporations are declaring bankruptcy and avoiding the cost of cleaning up, leaving taxpayers to make up for allthe cost (Easton,
Issued Presented: The Battery may occur regardless a physical contact, it is possible to compensate the mental and psychological damages caused by the Defendant's conduct. Also, are the Corporations liable for the conduct of his employees?
He is alleging the committing of tort within the state.Hereby, the defendant must have sufficient minimum contact with the named state. The plaintiff argues that the Gawker media has business transactions with Missouri businesses by specific direction of advertisements. However, the advertisements were placed by Google through a third party advertising program that's directed on a large scale and not specifically directed to Missouri residents. As a result, since the defendants did not physically direct the advertisement to Missouri residents; there is not enough evidence to exercise long-arm
B. Reason to Listen: We should take interest because it encompasses our ideologies towards government officials and government issues.
In this law brief, I will discuss two cases that all stem from one series of incidents. First, Greene Jewelry Company sued its former employee, Jennifer Lawson, for breach of confidentiality. Ms. Lawson is countersuing her former company for wrongful termination. In order to discuss all aspects of the cases against Greene Jewelry, I will address the aspects of the case individually.
In the film A Civil Action by John Travolta, several families sued two important companies for the death of their children. The plaintiffs alleged that two companies; Beatrice foods and WR grace, were the source of the deaths due to discarding toxic waste in a river where the town of Woburn gets their water supply. While watching this movie, I watched with astonishment and convinced with the determinations on the plaintiff's behalf to win the case. First, I thought the plaintiff's motive was to win the case for the money, but as the movie transitioned along I perceived that the families only wanted forgiveness from the companies. One of the mothers Mrs. Anderson stated, “Now, I want to be clear. I’m not interested in money, none of us are.
This case involves the concept of tort which means a wrong. There are three types of torts: intentional torts, unintentional torts (negligence) and strict liability. Intentional tort is a category of torts that require the defendant possessed intention to do the act the cause the plaintiff’s injury. Unintentional tort is a doctrine that says a person is liable for harm that is foreseeable consequences of his or her action, and strict liability means liability without fault. The injuries from torts include assault, battery, false imprisonment, misappropriation of the right to publicity,
The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that we, as citizens, have the right to free speech. Our freedom, however, comes with responsibilities that must be respected in order to maintain independence in our country.
C. Closure: Develop a creative closing that will give the speech a sense of ending. Refer back to your Attention Getter.
The first amendment of the Constitution declares, essentially, that no individual, institution, or any laws made by individuals or institutions may abridge a citizen's right to free speech.
The Freedom of Speech clause falls under the First Amendment and is one of the most cherished rights us Americans can uphold. It has also caused many limitations because of the choices people make under this right. These limitations; or some may even call them restrictions, should not be valid. Although, the legal definition states that speech can be expressed with no unwarranted government restriction.1 Meaning no matter what circumstance anyone should be able to
The crime rate in Puerto Rico is an issue that in recent decades has been on everyone's
In conclusion when delivering a public speech it was vital to leave time for questions and answers. This helped to know if the message was clearly understood by the audience and would be remembered. This section also empowered me to handle questions and answers section since some questions asked by audience were challenging and needed critical thinking.