The court should rule against Scripto. Since the company was a defendant in twenty-five lawsuits for injuries and one death in the Calles case, they should be required to rethink their product design and come up with solutions to prevent injuries and deaths in the future. Even the loss of one life is too much. As part of evidence, Calles presented statistics about deaths and injuries because of fires started by children. She also explained that a lighter with a child-resistant safety device would reduce the cost which society would incur for the damages, deaths, and injuries (“Calles v. Scripto-Tokai Corp., 864 N.E.2d 249, 224 Ill. 2d 247”). Calles admitted that children could climb onto the counter and access the top shelf. In addition, she
The appeal was heard in The NSW Supreme Court, Court of Appeal. The appellant appealed the issue of “blameless accidents” therefore providing new evidence, with the view that the preceding judge made an error recognising the content and scope of duty of care. He also noted the breach of duty of care and causation .
Her little boy wasn't expected to make it through the night, the voice on the line said (“Determined to be heard”). Joshua Deshaney had been hospitalized in a life threatening coma after being brutally beat up by his father, Randy Deshaney. Randy had a history of abuse to his son prior to this event and had been working with the Department of Social Services to keep custody over his son. The court case was filed by Joshua's mother, Melody Deshaney, who was suing the DSS employees on behalf of failing to protect her son from his father. To understand the Deshaney v. Winnebago County Court case and the Supreme courts ruling, it's important to analyze the background, the court's decision, and how this case has impacted our society.
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 was protected under the due process clause. The Goss decision came during a time when a due process revolution was happening in the United States. During this revolution, the Supreme Court recognized many new property interests in government benefits as the basis
General education high school teacher, Michael Withers, failed to comply with his student’s Individual Education Plan (IEP). D.D. Doe’s IEP required tests to be read orally. Despite knowledge of this IEP and being instructed to follow the IEP by the superintendent, school principal, special education director, and special education teacher, Withers still refused to make the accommodations for D.D.’s handicapping condition. As a result, D.D. failed the history class. His parents filed charges against Withers, arguing that D.D was not afforded the right to a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) promised to all students by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). They also filed a claim for injuctive relief against the Taylor County Board of Education to enforce the laws that protect handicapped students.
Was Dred Scott a free man or a slave? The Dred Scott v. Sandford case is about a slave named Dred Scott from Missouri who sued for his freedom. His owner, John Emerson, had taken Scott along with him to Illinois which was one of the states that prohibited slavery. Scott’s owner later passed away after returning back to Missouri. After suits and counter suits the case eventually made it to the Supreme Court with a 7-2 decision. Chief Justice Taney spoke for the majority, when saying that Dred Scott could not sue because he was not a citizen, also that congress did not have the constitutional power to abolish slavery, and that the Missouri compromise was unconstitutional. The case is very important, because it had a lot
Stuart v. Nappi was class lawsuit Stuart’s mother filed against school personnel and the Danbury Board of Education because she claimed that her daughter was not receiving the rights granted in the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA). Kathy Stuart was a student at Danbury High School in Connecticut with serious emotional, behavior, and academic difficulties. She was suppose to be in special education classes, but for some reason she hardly ever attended them. Kathy was involved in a school-wide disturbance. As a result of her complicity in these disturbances, she received a ten-day disciplinary suspension and was scheduled to appear at a disciplinary hearing. The Superintendent of Danbury Schools recommended to the Danbury Board of Education
to the fact a cigarette was the cause of the fire. This implies to the
Section 718.2e is a section of the Criminal code used to sentence aboriginal offenders. Its main purpose is to make the overrepresentation of aboriginal offending minimal. (Griffiths, 69). This idea was re established during the R.v. Gladue case in 1999 where the judge looked at the background factors that led the offender to commit a crime. Section 718.2e of the Criminal code states that the judge must consider the following:
Social Work is the study of people and how they interact with the systems in their environment and other people. Social Workers use theories, sets of ideas or concepts, of human behavior and apply them within their professional social work ethics to the problems facing clients in order to help them gain balance in the systems in their lives. Theories help to organize knowledge enabling social workers to help make sense of problems. There are many different theories. They have been grouped into broad categories called theoretical lenses (Rogers, A. 2013).
73-year-old Lawrence Covieo was limited in his ability to go places. "I was on Oxygen for 9 years and unable to go anywhere because of a hose that was attached to me."
According to the article of Brazill v. State district Court of Appeal of Florida written by Gross (2003) Brazill classmates claimed that he appeared to be angry during this time, but students calmed he was not crying or shaking meaning there were no kind of remorse. Brazill frustration began to grow when he wasn’t getting what he wanted and eventually he pulled the slide back onto his grandfather’s weapon while Grunow attempted to close the classroom door as he tried to protect the students and himself, Brazill pulled the trigger and Grunow fell to the floor, with a gunshot wound between the eyes (Gross, 2003). A school surveillance videotape of the hallway revealed that Brazill then had pointed the gun at Grunow for nine seconds before shooting
Nearly every aspect of law enforcement has a court decision that governs criteria. Most court rulings are the result of civil lawsuit towards a police officer and agency. However, currently, there is no law that mandates law enforcement driver training. When it comes to firearms, negligence by officers has resulted in a multitude of court rulings. Popow v. City of Margate, 1979, is a particularly interesting case that outlines failed firearms training by an agency. In this case, an officer chasing a suspect during a foot pursuit fired at the suspect, striking and killing an innocent bystander (Justia.com, 2017). The court ruled that the agency was “grossly negligent” of “failure to train” (Justia.com, 2017). As a result, nearly every agency requires annual firearms training and has written policy concerning the same. Officers must show proficiency in firearms use every year to maintain their certification. Many states even impose fines on officers for
This case arises from a November 14, 2010 fire, which damaged a Dunkin Donuts (the “Property”) owned and operated by the Plaintiffs. The Plaintiff’s had hired the Defendant to renovate the property. The fire occurred while the Property was closed for renovations, and the Defendant was in sole possession and control of the Property during the renovation. The fire originated at or near a gas-fired water heater that was located in a storage/utility closet at the Property. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant placed combustible materials near the hot water heater, which then caught fire. Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks reimbursement of proceeds
This case refers to a decision made by the Supreme Court of California, pertaining to injuries suffered by the plaintiff when a bottle of Coca-Cola exploded in her hand as she was moving it from the case to a refrigerator.
The rule of law, simply put, is a principle that no one is above the law. This means that there should be no leniency for a person because of peerage, sex, religion or financial standing. England and Wales do not have a written constitution therefore the Rule of Law, which along with the parliamentary Sovereignty was regarded by legal analyst A.C Dicey, as the pillars of the UK Constitution. The Rule of Law was said to be adopted as the “unwritten constitution of Great Britain”.