PLAINTIFF’S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FACTS AND BACKGROUND 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
It has been asked in the given scenario to evaluate Neuberger LJ's approach to the relationship between the doctrines of the constructive trust and proprietary estoppel. To evaluate that, it is necessary to explain the definition of the constructive trust and proprietary estoppel . Constructive trust is basically a form of trust which has been created by the courts where the defendant has dealt with proprietary in an "unconscionable manner", such as stealing or possessing it via fraud etc. Millet
Land Law Coursework It has been generally acknowledged that the doctrine of proprietary estoppel has much in common with common intention constructive trusts, i.e. those that concern the acquisition of an equitable interest in another person’s land. In effect, the general aim is the recognition of real property rights informally created. The similarity between the two doctrines become clear in a variety of cases where the court rely on either of the two doctrines. To show the distinction between
the cost of military drones is lower than the cost of sending regular airplanes and actual soldiers to worldwide nations ("Shaving Costs"). Finally, supporters of drones will share their belief that drones are able to strike accurately and reduce collateral damage to civilians around its area (Foust). Those who profess these ideas do not consider the terrible risks and the dangerous affects that drones place on their target lands and the pathos citizens that reside there. By using drones in worldwide
Across my many years of playing sports and being active, I have had multiple injuries and gotten banged up a few times. I have gotten cuts and bruises and twisted ankles many times, but only twice have I had a significant injury. When I was about nine years old, I accidentally flipped over the handlebars while riding a scooter and ended up unknowingly chipping a bone in my elbow. After about seven or eight years, an x-ray showed a bone chip floating around in the elbow joint, and surgery was needed
Should Felons Vote? In the United States 2.2 million citizens are incarcerated on felony charges. Laws in America prohibit felons from voting. As a result, on Election Day 5.3 million citizens of America are disenfranchised because of crimes they once committed. Though they once broke the law, they have served their time and have been punished adequately in accordance with the American Justice System. Felons should regain full voting rights after their stint in prison. Most politicians argue that
Don Quixote once said, “he admires Sancho Panza because he doubts everything and he believes everything”. What if people was more like Sancho Panza, and was more willing to exercise the ability to see something differently? Furthermore, Peter Elbow the creator of the Believing Game challenges people to be skeptical and analytic with every idea we encounter. In addition, he challenges us to put forth the effort to believe or at least consider the reasons of the opposing point of view. Therefore, there
defenses and justification defenses. (Lawteacher.net, 2014) Focusing on excuse defense, some examples are known as; age, mental disorder, automatism, mistake of fact, and mistake of law. (Lawteacher.net, 2014) Mental disorder is defined as “disease of the mind.” (Lawteacher.net, 2014) This excuse supports that the defendant was not thinking normally at the time of the criminal act and therefor did not understand the act of the crime they committed. (Lawteacher.net, 2014) Some examples of mental
constitutional. Both entities could be involved in the case and still not be considered a sham prosecution due to the dual soveriegn entities. The prosecutor upholding the Double Jeopardy Clause, Utilizing the dual sovereignty doctrine, and holding the collateral estoppel inapplicable in prosecuting. In the case where prosecution from two states for the same conduct is not barred by the double jeopardy clause as in Heath v. Alabama, 474 U.S. 82 (1985). Defendant was convicted in Alabama
According to Kubasek, Browne, Dhooge, Herron, and Barkacs (2016), the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) was created in 1952 and all fifty states, as well as the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands, have adopted it either in part or in whole. The UCC becomes the law for any state that adopts all or portions of it, becoming the commercial code for that state. It comes with 11 sections, called articles. The articles cover a wide range of business transactions ranging from sales contracts
all these statements represent a summary of the First, the court was required to decide if the district court has fairly taken the final judicial decision in conformity with laws. This concerned its ruling in relation with res judicata and collateral estoppel, which the court used to dismiss the case. According to Christian (2011), an act is considered forever solved once the litigation is purged and the time of appeals expired. This was an important question the court of appeals should address.
CHAPTERIZATION CHAPTERS PGNO 1- INTRODUCTION 6 2- WHAT IS INDMENITY? 7 3- SECTION 124 DEFINATION OF CONTARCT OF INDEMNITY 8 4- INDMENITY UNDER ENGLISH LAW (COMPARISON)