UNIT 2 LAW 205 HOMEWORK

.docx

School

American Military University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

205

Subject

Accounting

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by ProfessorRam11604

1. Locate a 1998 Alabama Criminal case where the defendant, Clark, appealed his criminal conviction claiming that there was not sufficient evidence to support the conviction and his probation was improperly revoked. a. Provide the correct citation to the Alabama case that governs this question. 728 So.2d 1126 b. Describe in your own words the subject matter of the defendant’s conviction. The subject matter of Andrew Bert Clark’s conviction was his conviction on him shooting his friend Tom Posey six times with a .22 caliber gun three times in the head and back. The main points are if there was substantial evidence for Clark being tried for capital murder. If the judge and court denied Clark’s motion for recusal. Were his mental health conditions from childhood abuse taken into consideration? Lastly, if the court fail to instruct the jury on lesser included offense of manslaughter. However, Andrew Bert Clark was found guilty of capital murder with no errors found in his case. 2. The client is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of an Ohio corporation. The Board of Directors has decided to merge the corporation with another Ohio corporation. The client wants to know if share-holder approval is required for the merger. a. Provide the correct citation to the Ohio statute that governs this question. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 1701.78 (West) b. Describe in your own words what the statute says about shareholder approval. What this statute says about shareholder approval is. The agreement for share-holder approval shall be approved by each of the directors on each corporation. Furthermore, before any approval, there must be a notice to each corporation for an agreement of merger submitted and given to each shareholder of both corporations. Included should be the material provisions of the agreement for each corporation and shareholder. 3. KeyCite this case: United States v. Martinez-Jimenez, 864 F .2d 664 (9 th Cir. 1989). a. Provide proper citations of the 1995 and 1993 cases listed under “Positive History” that have a yellow flag. State v. Martinez-Jimenez , 85 Wash. App. 1068 (1997). 4. Client and her husband are residents of the state of Georgia. She wants to sue for divorce claiming adultery. She does not want to file a no-fault divorce. a. Provide the correct citation to the Georgia statute that governs this questions. 19-5-10. Duty of judge in undefended divorce cases; appointment of attorney; evidentiary hearings; evidentiary attacks on prior judgments., O.C.G.A. § 19-5-10 (Current through the 2021 Regular Session of the General Assembly.), available at https://advance-lexis- com.postu.idm.oclc.org/api/document?collection=statutes-

legislation&id=urn:contentItem:6348-FVW1-DYB7-W4H6-00000- 00&context=1516831 . b. Describe in your own words what the statute says about grounds for divorce. What the statute says about grounds for divorce are. The judge should be able to determine the grounds for divorce and shall have legal proof. A hearing should be established the issues and both parties can make their pleadings. However, adultery from either party under Georgia statute is sufficient to authorize grounds for divorce. 5. While walking her dog in a city park, Client’s dog was attacked by another dog. Before the dogs could be separated, Client’s dog was severely injured and died later that day. Client’s dog was on a leash and the other dog was not leashed. Client was very close to her pet and wants to sue the owner of the other dog for emotional distress she suffered as a result of witnessing the attack and death of her pet. Your supervisory attorney remembers there was an Arizona case where under similar facts, recovery was denied. a. Provide the correct citation to the case. Roman v. Carroll, 127 Ariz. 398, 621 P.2d 307, 1980 Ariz. App. LEXIS 652 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division Two December 19, 1980 ), available at https://advance- lexis-com.postu.idm.oclc.org/api/document?collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3RX3- YKS0-003F-T07Y-00000-00&context=1516831 . b. Describe in your own words why the plaintiff’s claim was denied. Although Jane Roman experienced emotional distress in the death of her dog from Robert and Grace Carroll dog. Jane’s claim was denied because the judge ruled her dog was personal property. Damages are not recoverable under personal property for negligent infliction of emotional distress. Jane may have been close to her dog but the negligent infliction of emotional distress result from the loss of her dog. The acts must compensate the injured person resulting mental or emotional injury. If the Carroll’s dog however attacked her then that would be a different story for emotional distress so in conclusion this is why her claim was denied. 6. Select “Shepardize.” For the case of Harris v. Cincinnati, 79 Ohio APP. 3d 163, 607 N.E. 2d 15 (1992). a. Provide proper citations for three citing decisions are listed. Harris v. Cincinnati, 79 Ohio App. 3d 163, 607 N.E.2d 15, 1992 Ohio App. LEXIS 1719 (Court of Appeals of Ohio, First Appellate District, Hamilton CountyApril 1, 1992, Entered ), available at https://advance-lexis-com.postu.idm.oclc.org/api/document? collection=cases&id=urn:contentItem:3S3M-1930-003C-80XK-00000-00&context=1516831 . Rule 52. Findings by the court , Ohio Civ. R. 52 (Rules current through rule amendments received through August 1, 2021), available

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version