Harris V. Jones Analysis

See Love-Lace v. Martin, 355 F.3d 766, 782 (4th Cir. 2004) (no respondeat superior liability under §1983); Monell v. New York Dep’t of Soc. Serv., 436 U.S. 658, 691 (1978). In order for liability to exist under § 1983, there must be personal involvement by the Defendant in the alleged violation.

when Sue Sylvester learned that Mr. shuester had killed Titan she was very upset at losing her companion Ms. Sylvester has come to our office to ask if she can sue Mr. Schuester over the death of her beloved Titan I am considering filing a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Please review the attached case, Ammon v. Welty, 113 S.W.3d 185 (Ky. App. 2002), assume it states the current law on the topic, and write an analysis of whether Mr. Schuester’s conduct meets the “intent” element of a claim for intentional infliction of emotional

7. Under no circumstances should Eran Gregory Edwards be able to pick up Addilyn Grace Edwards in his personal use vehicle, due to the following; under laws provided for Ignition Interlock Device for a child including the event of an emergency, Jessica Janette Parish Fine, Criminal records, anger issues, alcohol and drug use. 8. In the event of Addilyn Grace Edwards medical insurance being suspended at any time, Eran Gregory Edwards should provide all medical and dental insurance and pay for any medical and dental

In order to maintain a claim regarding medical malpractice, a plaintiff must show 1) a duty owed to the plaintiff by the defendant (inherent, voluntary, or statutory) 2) a breach of the duty by allowing the conduct to fall below the standard of care, and 3) a compensable injury proximately caused by the defendant’s breach of duty. Carey was able to establish an inherent duty was owed to him by Connelly but was not able to provide evidence to support his claim about the breach of duty by conduct or that his injury was caused solely by the conduct of

A review of the events involving the North Charleston, S. Carolina Whitlee Jones murder case as it applies to the Tennessee “stand your ground” statute brings several factors into question. As indicated in the article, South Carolina’s law as does Tennessee’s states that a person having reasonable fear of death or serious bodily harm can use deadly force on the unlawful intruder. However, this does not apply to a lawful resident or a person who has a legal right to be in the dwelling, business, or auto (Knapp, 2014). As Jones indicates she removes herself from the danger on several occasions, yet she continues to return, placing herself once again in position to receive serious injury or death from her boyfriend who is legally occupying the

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.

1. Write a brief summary (one paragraph each of 3-5 sentences) of the New Jersey v. T.L.O. and Vernonia v. Acton cases. In the New Jersey v. T.L.O. the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the school district, after they found a 14 year old girl smoking in the bathroom. And got her consent to search her bag. In which they found different types of drugs as well as she had intended to sell.

3d 4 (2012), it states that the elements of a prima facie case for the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress are: (1) extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant with the intention of causing, or reckless disregard of the probability of causing, emotional distress; (2) the plaintiff's suffering severe or extreme emotional distress; and (3) actual and proximate causation of the emotional distress by the defendant's outrageous conduct. Browning’s actions were examples of extreme and outrageous conduct with the intent of causing emotional distress as they directly called La Pierre names and followed her for blocks. The doctors have diagnosed LaPierre with severe trauma after the incident which meets the second element, and finally, La Pierre would not have suffered any trauma if it were not for Browning inflicting severe emotional distress towards her which means his conduct is the actual and proximate cause of her

The United States’ Bill of Rights was effected in December 15, 1791. This was done two years after the Congress forwarded to the state Legislatures twelve proposed constitution amendments. The third amendment through to the twelfth amendment were adopted to become the Bill of Rights of the United States. The proposition of the Bill of Rights was done by James Madison mainly as a response to constitution opponents including some founding fathers who were against the ratification of the constitution on grounds that it failed to safeguard basic human liberty principles. On June 8, 1791 he presented a series of thirty-nine constitution amendments to the House of Representatives part of which proposed the constitution to be opened up and specific

Overview of Clements v. State The case of Clements v. State is an example of how the legal framework of stalking laws in Texas should be interpreted and the effectiveness of this law to ensure justice for the victims. The case depicts how the law should operate despite certain vagueness in aspects of the First Amendment. The decision of the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas to uphold the conviction while disagreeing with some conclusions arrived at by the trial court proves that stalkers will not be allowed to slide through cracks in the legal system. The case, based on a sequence of events where the complainant, Jennifer Clements, was subject to psychological trauma accompanied by an imminent physical threat to her from Nathan Clement, her estranged husband, is a forthright condition of stalking which complies with the Statues of

The duty of any criminal prosecutor is to seek justice. A conviction is the end of justice being served prior to sentencing; however justice cannot be served if an innocent person is found guilty. Even though the prosecutor(s) are there to represent the public and has the duty to aggressively pursue offenders for violations of state and federal laws, they shall never lose sight or their own moral compass of their main purpose is to find the truth. In the pursuit of truth, the United States Supreme Court has developed or made rulings in reference to several principles of conduct which have to be followed by all prosecutors to assure that the accused person(s) are allowed the proper procedures and due process of the law granted by the 14th Amendment.

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 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.

In his complaint, which tort theory is Julian’s attorney most likely to allege and what will he have to prove for Julian to be successful? 
Julian’s attorney is most likely to allege that mike reacted in a negligent matter in his complaint. As people it is our duty to act reasonably. A reasonable person would not have picked up Julian after witnessing him take a kick to the head. A reasonable person should not move a person who has received a kick to the head.

Critical analysis of negligence and present legal scenario Abstract- The goal of this topic is to set out clearly what critical analysis is in general and how it plays itself out in variety of domains. Critical analysis too refers to critical thinking. The danger of misunderstanding and misapplication is touched in this topic the aim of this topic is to identify a coherent legal response to a particular casual problem of “negligence” in critical analysis it is important to identify the focus of the assignment .critical begins with identify your own point to view Introduction