Gibbons Vs Ogden Case Study

Kaelea Tullly Moran v. Burbine Case When detained by the Police in Cranston, Rhode Island for breaking and entering Brian Burine was immediately given his Miranda Rights and he denied his right to a lawyer. Though the entire process the piece seemed to have obtained evidence they Mr. Burbine had committed a murder in near by providence Rhode Island. He confessed to the breaking and entering and tot the murder when he waved his rights. Because Mr. Burbine’s sister knew he had an appointment with a certain lawyer she called his office but he specifically was not available but his partner was.

The Extent Of “Ownership” in Land As discussed above, ownership in land is the interest in land or ownership of an estate. So as a fee simple owner, what rights does one have over the ground, under his or her property or in the airspace above it? From notary or lawyer point of view, these are very important questions because laws governing land, air and water boundaries are involved. “The maxim cujus est solum ejus est usque ad coelom et ad inferos means whoever owns the soil, holds title all the way up to the heavens and down to the depths of the earth (Ziff 94).”

The case United States v. Lawson, 2009 WL 1916063 (Ky. 2009) deals extensively with FRE Rule 404(b). In the case four different items of evidence are viewed for admissibility under Rule 404. The case focuses on three co-defendants who are charged with five counts of bribery conspiracy and three counts of conspiracy on construction or repair of state roads and highways. The motion viewed focuses on Nighbert, a co-defendant, and his objections to admitting certain evidence against him under Rule 404(b). The four items are: an FBI report of an alleged conversation Nighbert had with the mayor regarding his son, failed disclosure on financial forms of his ownership of a company, an FBI interview concerning Kentucky road contracts and Nighbert, and a newspaper article regarding the defendant’s property and nearby construction.

Webster argued the Constitution was design to settle such economic disputes between states. Allowing concurrent laws to conflict would be dangerous and contagious if not handled by the federal government. Attorney Writ supported the federal supremacy over these states was enumerated in the Constitution. Gibbons’ steamboats operated “among several states” (US National Archives & Records Administration n.d.), and the Commerce Clause states, “ Congress shall have the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among several States, and with Indian tribes” (US National Archives & Records Administration n.d.). Gibbons’ steamboats in fact operated in New Jersey and in New York; therefore it aptly applied in this situation.

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:

Clarendon County, South Carolina — Briggs v. Elliot: Began in 1947 when Reverend Joseph Albert DeLaine wanted free bus transportation for his three children. Initially targeting equality and not integration, Marshall visited and in 1949, 20 plaintiffs demanded equal treatment across the board in transportation, buildings, teachers' salaries and educational materials. The case was named Briggs after the first plaintiff in alphabetical order and Elliot was the chairman of the school district. There were 47 black students in a class, to 28 white. There were no bathrooms or electricity at the black schools.

Emily DePasquale PSC 312 Professor Parker 25th October 2017 United States vs. EC Knight Co. In the case of United States vs. EC Knight Co. (1895), the issue of commerce power came to rise. Commerce power at the time was determined by methods of broad interpretation, seeing as the Supreme Court didn’t rule any definitive decisions until later. As a result, conflicts of commerce existed between small instate businesses and larger interstate businesses holding monopolies over certain industries. As a result of these business monopolies and relating health issues, Congress created a commerce clause to help regulate existing issues.

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.

This case was a Supreme Court case that was argued on December 17, 1970, and decided on March 8, 1971. The case surrounded the topic of employment discrimination, and the adverse impact theory. Griggs v Duke Power was initially a lawsuit that was placed by Willie Griggs and twelve other African-American employees that had worked at the Duke Power plant in Draper, North Carolina. They believed they were victims of race discrimination, and unfair hiring expectations. The plaintiffs' disputation was Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

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.

A. O’Connor v. Donaldson 1975: In this precedent, the supreme court decided that the presence of mental illness alone is not enough to warrant involuntary confinement. If the patient is no longer found dangerous to him/herself or others, there is no justification to continue confinement. Commitment needs to be justified on the basis of mental disease and dangerousness. This precedent is applicable to the case of Mr. Y, because the statement above states dangerousness and mental illness as a basis for justifying continual commitment for Mr. Y. If the preponderance of evidence shows that Mr. Y is dangerous due to his mental disease, then deciding to civilly commit him would meet the requirement of this precedent case.

Thomas Jefferson disagrees with the idea that Congress could broadly interpret the clause’s powers, because he believes that when the majority of Congress does, it will enable them to do whatever they want to do. And Jefferson says, “…it (Congress) would be also a power to do whatever evil they please and this can never be permitted.” Congress has had the ability to “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper” through the Necessary and Proper Clause, establishing federal power, regulating future endeavors, this has led to speculation within our government. Even with the controversy of the Necessary and Proper Clause, many would say that this clause has helped with future endeavors, such as railroads and computers. However, we see that time and time again the powers of the state our over-powered by the federal government, as we saw in the McCulloch v. Maryland case.

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.

The Commerce Clause in the Constitution of the United States grants Congress the power to regulate commerce with foreign Nations, among states and within the Indian Tribes. Congress has the authority to put limitation on the rights of the states to regulate commerce within their own borders. I feel we are currently in era in which there is an emphasis taxation instead of spending. With the economy as it is today, it seems that we are being heavily tax on items from groceries, gas, auto taxes, furniture and clothing. On the other hand taxing certain products such as tobacco works two fold.

It is not a defense that the dog has never shown vicious behavior or bitten anyone in the past. In the case Supan V. Griffin, Griffin failed to provide evidence that the dog had ever bitten anyone in the past. However, the owner made a comment to his neighbor which “raised genuine issue of material fact as to owner’s knowledge of his dogs’ tendency to attack” and allowed the court to rule against the dog owner. This is similar to Roberts’ case in the fact that Chip has never bitten anyone, but, the owner knew of the dog’s propensity to chase down the football. Again, Robert’s knew of the dog’s inclination to celebrate and chase down the ball, even if it landed in the stands, and knew the possibility of injuring a patron.