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. Issue : Can a plaintiff choose venue based on past case history within jurisdiction and representing council also represented winning plaintiff in that case with no ties to location of action or treatement of action. Is a Defendant allowed to request transfer from a higher court. …show more content…
The court granted Nestles request for transfer of the action to the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. Reason : The court pointed out that the plaintiff resides in South Carolina, her daughters injuries occurred there and her medical treatment was there and continues to be there therefore making South Carolina the appropriate place for the litigation to proceed. A court should not be required to expend resources on cases that have little relationship to the district
Case Citation: Gallagher v. Cayuga Medical Center 151 AD 3d 1349 - NY: Appellate Div., 3rd Dept. 2017 Background: In this civil case Timothy W. Gallagher is the appellant, and Cayuga Medical Center (CMC) is the respondents. The case took place in the appellate division of the supreme court of New York, division three. The plaintiff’s complaint was that Cayuga Medical Center had asserted medical malpractice, negligence, wrongful death and emotional distressed.
Susan purchased two dented cans of chicken from Superfast grocery store that were on a table labeled “damaged cans - half price”. She brought the two cans home and made a chicken pot pie with them for herself and a guest. After eating the pie, both became ill. The medical testimony in this case showed that the illness was caused by the chicken being unfit for human consumption.
Case Name, Citation, Year Cook v. Florida High School Athletic Association (FHSAA), 09-cv-00547 M.D. Fla. (2009) Facts of the Case: On June 16, 2009 parents of female athletes at FHSAA member schools filed suit against the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida alleging that the newPolicy 6 discriminates against female students according to Title IX by reducing school participation in completions by 40 percent at the varsity level and 20 percent at the sub-varsity level. The plaintiffs also stated a complaint that male driven sports where exempt from this action because cheerleading was not recognized as a sport thus breaking the Title IX law. Issues: Why did Policy 6 reduced the number of competitions
The Plaintiff did not fulfill her contractual obligation to negotiate her claim with the Defendant prior to filing the lawsuit. The Defendant affidavit is attached herein. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing fact, and as the Plaintiff did not fulfill her contractual obligations, Defendant requests the Court to dismiss this case complying with forgoing New York federal court decision. Date: New York, New York June 18,
The trial court dismissed the complaint. Susan Kirkpatrick then appealed the decision, suing the insurance company of John Zitz, Transamerica Insurance Company, for intentional infliction of emotional distress by telling Zitz to not tell Kirkpatrick that the skunk she was bitten by, had been lost. Procedural History: (How did this case get to this court? What occurred before in the court below, if any?) John Zitz, owner of the pet store, was sued in trial court for injuries sustained by
Worcester v. Georgia By Sydney Stephenson Worcester v. Georgia is a case that impacted tribal sovereignty in the United States and the amount of power the state had over native American territories. Samuel Worcester was a minister affiliated with the ABCFM (American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions). In 1827 the board sent Worcester to join its Cherokee mission in Georgia. Upon his arrival, Worcester began working with Elias Boudinot, the editor of the Cherokee Phoenix (the first Native American newspaper in the United States) to translate religious text into the Cherokee language. Over time Worcester became a close friend of the Cherokee leaders and advised them about their political and legal rights under the Constitution and federal-Cherokee treaties.
Pursing this argument further about the use of informant’s I would now like to observe the credibility of an informant is yet another attribute that leads to the wrongful conviction of the innocent. In the case of North Carolina vs. Darryl Hunt, there were multiple informants used to testify in case. Darryl Hunt who was wrongly convicted at just the age of 19 back in 1984 and spent 19 years of his life locked away after he was accused of the murder of young white beautiful Deborah Sykes a newspaper editor at the time. Although Darryl had DNA testing to prove his innocents, judicial system place the blame on this young, at the time African American male, in order to come to a resolution. Throughout the Darryl Hunt case there were faulty eyewitness testimonies that not only corrupted the
In response to the suit filed, Betty’s lawyer filed for a motion to dismiss due to lack of jurisdiction. Subject-matter jurisdiction does not impede the trial courts reach to try out-of-state defendants. The ensuing issue for the trial court is to determine in-personam jurisdiction. This form of jurisdiction focuses on the residence, location, and activities of the defendant (Mallor, 30). Traditional in-personam jurisdiction would not apply to Betty.
The appellant essential accommodation claim went to trial but court excluded evidence regarding to disability. The plaintiff’s is not estopped by her SSDI and long term disability claims. However the issue should have been decided by jury. The court foreclosed to grant the plaintiff was not a qualified individual.
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.
Dr. Stout’s failure to specifically allege wrongdoing by Health Management precludes recovery under any of the causes of action set forth in the Amended Claims. Accordingly, dismissal is appropriate. Dr. Stout agrees or alleges that the Practice, the Statesville HMA, LLC (“the Hospital”), and Health Management are three separate, distinct corporate entities, as follows: (1) the Practice “is a North Carolina Limited Liability Company in good standing with the North Carolina Secretary of State” ; (2) the Hospital “is a limited liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of North Carolina, with its principal place of business in Iredell County, North Carolina” ; and (3) Health Management “is a corporation, duly
A venue is where the case takes place. It could be the state the issue occurred in, where the plaintiff lives, or sometimes where the defendant lives. Venues are important because the venue chosen has to have subject matter jurisdiction over the case. They are also important because they sort out the amount of cases that are going on in the system to make sure the justice system is not overloaded. 5.
The case that I will be talking about today is the case of POM Wonderful LLC vs Coca-Cola Company in which POM Wonderful felt that Coca-Cola was using false advertising to promote its own drink to sell to customers. POM Wonderful makes its own fruits to be used in their fruit chooses and they sell a drink that is made of 100 percent fruit juices with 85 percent being pomegranate juice and the other 15 percent blueberry juice. Coca-Cola also make a juice drink through the Minute Maid division of their company with the label saying pomegranate blueberry in giant letters. The Coca-Cola juice is made with only 0.3 percent of pomegranate juice and 0.2 percent of blueberry juice along with 0.1 percent of raspberry juice and 99.4 percent of a combination of apple and grape juices. The focus of the complaint was that the Coca-Cola juice label had the words pomegranate and blueberry in all capital letters and then underneath that the words got smaller and explained that it was a “flavored blend of 5 juices” and that it was made “from concentrate with added ingredients” (Cheeseman).
The plaintiff is not estopped by her SSDI and long term disability claims. However, the issue should have been decided by the jury. The court foreclosed to grant the plaintiff was not a qualified individual. The issue is whether the district court correctly granted summary judgment in the favor of the defendant because the shaker table rotation rule at issue was an essential function of the employee’s job.
• The case is determined by the payor to no longer meet the criteria for case management. • The case management assignment has been for