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
The failure to talk to the justice of the peace is not evidence of fraud; see Young v Hoger [2001] QCA 453 at [26]. The other conduct by the agents did not amount to fraud either as a result the court finds in favor of the plaintiff thus requiring Mr Gray to pay the mortgage and pursue legal action against SHELLA LONERGAN in pursuit of recovery of funds, as Fraud must be shown to have been practised against the person who seek relief who in this case is Mr
Case name: Peter K. Dementas v The Estate of Jack Tallas, 764 P.2d 628 (1988)
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.
Jones was party to the contract and mortgage together with Mrs Jones as surety for her husband, even though Mrs Jones was the actual owner of the property. This produced a legal consequence as it affected the appellants with a conduct on the part of the husband in relation to his wife which raised equities in her favour against the indication of a mortgage. The husband exercised undue influence on Mrs Jones to procure her signature to the mortgage which consisted of no consideration. The plaintiff brought proceedings against the defendant upon a contract to pay interest and principal contained in the mortgage over the property at Walkerville owned by Mrs Jones. It was understood that Mrs Jones executed the mortgage without understanding the effect of the contract and presumed various false misrepresentations. She argued that the mortgage which she s...
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
I at least expected them to have the same topics of importance. It is obvious that Elk Grove Village cares about their industrial and business sector and is trying to maintain it, but their justifications and reasoning for its importance are different. To the Trustee, it was for the benefit of the residents. To the Assistant Village Manager, it was to benefit their funds. This shows the difference in relationships with their residents. As I mentioned, the Trustee takes a hands on approach and that is applicable to this situation too. She wants a better community for her residents, not just herself. The Assistant Village Manager is focused on revenue and the taxes that come from businesses located in the
2. Were you involved in investigating possible illegal activities? If so, why did you feel it is necessary for public officials to remain honest?
City Hall needs to deflect criticisms and become more accountable. Image is not more important than action.
I agree to uphold the Aggie Honor Code on this exam. I agree to not research this case analysis online for previous responses to this case. Online research into the questions asked is acceptable.
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
"Florida Grand Jury Says Broward County School Board Corrupt, Should Be Abolished | Corrupt Authority." News on Government Corruption L City Hall L Budget Deficit L Legislation L Corrupt Authority. 19 Feb. 2011. Web. 16 Dec. 2011. .
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...
The construction site was in a downtown area of a large southeastern city, criss-crossed with city streets, utilities, and immediately adjacent to mid-rise and high rise buildings. Nearly all of the work was required to be constructed within temporary piling structures to limit settlement of adjacent structures. The construction contract called for seven phase releases of work areas and nine completion milestones, each milestone has its own liquidated damages penalty. The construction contract was valued at $10 million, and the duration was 545 calendar days. Following the completion of the work, the contractor filed a claim for $5.5 million and 1.1 million in interest. The authority subsequently denied the claim and the contractor, in accordance with the contract, filed an arbitration demand with the American Arbitration Association. Following the contractor’s issuance of the demand letter, the parties agreed to resolve the dispute through negotiation” (Ray,
To conclude, I would advise Brad and Chardonnay to exercise their right to claim damages from the surveyor as they have a strong case, based upon the relevant cases, evidence and legislation explained within this essay.
Preparation for the negotiation took around forty minutes. The contract was breached by us (Wood Crafters) and there was no supporting document. Our options were bankruptcy or selling the house. The opening offer was made by Viking. Wood Crafters could see that Viking felt that they had the power/rights which led to the distributive approach. Initially, Viking was pushing for Wood Crafters to pay the over-run, the loan and the rent but Wood Crafters pushed against it. Wood Crafters argument was that the over-run project was approved by Viking secretary, therefore, Wood Crafters offer was to file a bankruptcy which believed to be the best option at the time. By filing a bankruptcy, Viking would not be