Case Study: Griggs V. Duke Power Co.

Husky International Electronics, Inc. v. Daniel Lee Ritz, Jr. (2016) NATURE OF THE CASE A debt of $164,000.00 was incurred by Chrysalis Manufacturing Corp. to plaintiff Husky International Electronics, Inc. Daniel Lee Ritz, Jr., the director of Chrysalis and owner of 30% of common stock, transferred all of Chrysalis’ assets to other entities the respondent, Ritz controlled, diminishing the ability to pay the debt. Thus, in 2009 Husky filed suit against Ritz, at which time Ritz to file a Chapter 7 bankruptcy.

Plaintiff gave birth to Christa on September 9, 2006 at Spartanburg Regional Medical Center in Spartan burg, South Carolina. Plaintiff was given an unsolicited gift bag containing Nestle Good Start Supreme powdered infant formula at which time when they were discharged from the hospital she solely fed the infant the formula from the gift bag. Three days later the infant contracted meningitis resulting in severe brain damage that will prevent her from ever living independently. Plaintiff commenced instant action against Nestle alleging that the formula was tainted with bacteria causing the meningitis. Nestle moved case to federal court and moved to transfer action to District Of South Carolina.

Ogden vs. Gibbons was a controversial court case that was debated in 1824 after Aaron Ogden filed a restraint against Thomas Gibbons. Ogden and Gibbons were former business partners in the steamboat industry and for three years they successfully worked together throughout waterways in New York. Unfortunately Gibbons decided to operate another steamboat that came in conflict with Ogden’s steamboat and this is when Ogden filed a restraint against Gibbons. Ogden’s complaint was that he no longer wanted Gibbons to operate steamboats in New York waters. This was an important court case because the court had to figure out who had the power to control navigation in interstate waterways.

INTRODUCTION: This case involves the suspect being arrested for PC 148(a)(1)-Resisting/Delaying a Peace Officer and CVC 12500(a)-Unlicensed Driver. LOCATION DESCRIPTION: This incident occurred on Waverly Drive east of Pasadena Avenue. EVIDENCE:

Ronald Watts, 48 years old, a District tactical sergeant, and a patrol officer named Kallatt Mohammed, 47 years old, were both parts of the 2nd District tactical team in the Chicago Police Department. On the eve of February 13, 2012, both officers were formally charged in the U.S. District Court of Chicago by the Northern District of Illinois United State Attorney, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, with government funds theft. Mr. Watts was an 18-year police veteran and Mr. Mohammed was with the Chicago PD for 14 years. Their arrest was due to unseal complaints of police criminal misconduct by two whistleblower officers, Shannon Spalding and Daniel Echeverria , followed by a thorough investigation of, special of the Chicago Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Robert D. Grant and the police department’s Internal Affairs Division.

For the most part the opinion of the court in the Griggs case; held that the burden of establishing an employment requirement’s relationship to the performance of a job lies on the employer (Justia Law, 2017). Also, before Griggs, the employees or applicant had the burden of establishing a discriminatory intent behind an employment requirement (Justia Law, 2017). The Court concluded that the subtle, illegal, purpose of these requirements was a safeguard Duke’s long-standing policy to give job preference to its white employees (Justia Law,

The United States’ Constitution follows federalism, which is the division of power between state governments and the national government. Federalism is important to the Constitution because it helps prevent centralized power and allows the states flexibility to solve issues within their own states. Within federalism the states have been referred to as “Laboratories of democracy.” This term was coined by Justice Louis D. Brandeis in the New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann Supreme court case in 1932. His term made the states seem like a laboratory to experiment different policies that would have no effect on the whole country.

Business Law Case Study Essay: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, 573 U.S (2014) Facts: The Green family runs and owns Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., a national arts and skills chain that has over 500 stores and they have over 13,000 employees. Other facts of the case are that the Green family has been able to organize the business around the values of the Christian faith and has explicitly expressed the desire to run the company as told by Biblical principles, one of which is the belief that the utilization of contraception is wicked. Also, the facts show that under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), occupation -founded group health care plans must offer certain sorts of preventative care, for example, FDA-accepted contraceptive approaches.

Coker V GA 1977 is a case in which the petitioner Ehrlich Anthony Coker was convicted and sentenced to death for rape. The case went all the way to the United States Supreme Court in which the court overturned the ruling saying it violated the Eighth Amendment as being cruel and unusual punishment. The petitioner Ehrlich Anthony Coker was already in prison for various crimes such as murder, rape, kidnapping and aggravated assault, when he escaped from the correctional facility in Georgia. After escaping the facility, Mr. Coker entered into a home of a couple through an unlocked door.

Gibbons and Ogden ran competing ferry franchises and the controversy between the two was over ferry routes. Aaron Ogden was given a particular license that allowed him to operate his ferries on the Hudson River, between New York and New Jersey. His competitor, Thomas Gibbons, also ran steamboat ferries along this same route. Ogden claimed that he had a right to use the route because the state had issued him a special license to do so. “Gibbons claimed he had the right to operate on the route pursuant to a 1793 act”(McBride).

Coca-Cola Co. v. Koke Co. of America, 254 U.S. 143 (1920) U.S. Sup. Ct. Facts: 1886 marked the invention of a caramel-colored soft drink created by John Pemberton. Coca-Cola got its name after two main ingredients, coca leaves and kola nuts. The Coca-Cola Company is suing Koke Company of America from using the word Koke on their products. They believe Koke Company of America is violating trademark infringement and is unfairly making and selling a beverage for which a trademark Coke has used.

“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race,” Chief Justice John Roberts stated this on the Supreme Court case of Ricci v. DeStefano. This case, which was on the issue of discrimination of African American firefighters in the city of New Haven, Connecticut, isn’t the only one of its kind. Brown v. Board of Education, Korematsu v. U.S., and Batson v. Kentucky are just a few of many. Cases like these, the situations in Ferguson, Missouri, Baltimore, Maryland, and Sanford, Florida, have all occurred because of racial discrimination.

Throughout the history of America, blacks have continuously been perceived as inferior to whites. At first, due to the legality of slavery, blacks were not identified as people, but property. This was a regular practice until the passing of the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth amendments, which granted rights to black inhabitants of America. Hypothetically, these rights were to make newly freed slaves equal to their white cohabitants, but this wasn’t the case. Court cases, laws, and illicit practices, ensured that blacks would remain inferior to whites.

Luigi Vittatoe Dr. George Ackerman ELA2603 Administrative and Personnel Law December 2, 2015 Week 6 Case Study: R. Williams Construction Co. v. OSHRC 1. What were the legal issues in this case? What did the court decide? R. Williams Construction Company petitions for review of a final order of the OSHRC for violations of the OSHA Act.

In 1945, the High Court of Australia heard the case of Gratwick v Johnson and ultimately decided to dismiss the appeal in a unanimous decision by the Judges. While different reasoning was employed, all five judges drew the conclusion that the appeal should be dismissed as the statute the defendant was charged under was inconsistent with s.92 of the Australian Constitution. To provide some context for this case in 1944, Dulcie Johnson was charged with an offence against the National Security Act 1939-1943 in that she did contravene par.3 of the Restriction of Interstate Passenger Transport Order by travelling from South Australia to Western Australia by rail. In brief terms par.3 of the Restriction of Interstate Passenger Transport Order provided that no person shall, without a valid permit, travel from state to state or territory.