Case Analysis of US v. Emerson Essay examples

Philip J. Cooper v. Charles Austin 837 S. W. 2d 606 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1992)

b. What medium would you use to reach each of these parties and what would your relative resource allocation be to each?

Sparkle Company is a Nigerian diamond mining company. Sparkle is a joint venture, 50 percent owned by Shine and 50 percent owned by Brighten. Both Shine and Brighten are U.S.-based companies with their functional currency being the American dollar. Sparkle Companies functional currency is that of Nigeria, being the Naira. During 2009, Sparkle had several transactions with its joint venture owners and outside parties. The details of Sparkle’s transactions are three loans, three expenditures, and one revenue stream. The loans the company took out were $1 million from Brighten, $1 million from Shine, and 300 million Naira from a local Nigerian bank. The expenditures

An example of racial profiling that involves both Stop-and-Frisk and DWB is the incident behind Whren v. United States. The incident behind the case involved two black men, Michael Whren and James Lester Brown, in Washington D.C. who were driving a truck through a high drug area. An unmarked police car with two officers pulled up next to the truck that was stopped at a stop sign for an unreasonable amount of time and then sped away at a high speed. The police officers then pulled them over and saw a clear plastic bag. Under the suspicion that it was drugs, they searched the car and ended up finding a substantial amount of drugs. The decision of Whren v. United States says that if a police officer has a reasonable suspicion, he can stop the car for that reason alone. There is no need for a traffic offense because ‘driving suspiciously’ is enough to warrant a stop. While yes, they did see the plastic bag and that was the caused for the search, they stopped them because they were African American men in a high drug area and drove suspiciously. There is no saying that if they were two white men that they would not have been pulled over as well, however, if they were two black men not in a high drug area and drove suspiciously they would have still been more likely to be pulled over than two white men. This shows the underlying problem is not that the law directly discriminates, it’s that the police who enforce and the society who follows it that have biases and stereotypes that

In this case, Dick Heller, a police officer, authorized to carry a handgun while on duty wanted a handgun to own and keep at his home. The District of Columbia refused so Dick Heller filed a lawsuit in the Federal District Court in the District of Columbia, which eventually also went to the Supreme Court. In June 2008, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, determined the provisions of the Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1975 as unconstitutional. They stated that “handguns or arms for the purpose of self-defense do not have to be trigger locked”.

This case is talking about an executive retreat. It was introduced by John Matthews who was a executive had been selected to attend the two-and-a-half-week retreat. The retreat was more like a competition about academic and athletic. The team members should not only get know each other and cooperate with teammates but also need to compete with others. The whole participants were broken into five groups and their aim was to win the competition. There are several sessions about academic and athletic that the participants should complete. After the introduction part the case showed the experience of John. Before the group meeting John was wondering and worried about this retreat. When he was taking the first group meeting, he tried to learn

The Dred Scott Case had a huge impact on the United States as it is today. The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments have called it the worst Supreme Court decision ever rendered and was later overturned. The Dred Scott Decision was a key case regarding the issue of slavery; the case started as a slave seeking his rightful freedom and mushroomed into a whole lot more. 65

A landmark case in United States Law and the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States,

In order for the respondent, which was a local student at his school; to get his case dismissed he would have to prove that either he recently moved with interstate commerce or that he had some sort of tie to interstate commerce. In order for the court to uphold the respondents claim that 922(q) is justified because the possession of the firearm in a local school zone does indeed substantially influence interstate commerce, they would have to have the Supreme Court pile conjecture upon conjecture in an approach that would suggest reasonable to convert congressional Commerce Clause authority to a general police authority of the nature possessed only by the States.

Shakespeare Inc., a private publishing company issued its F/S on March 20, 2012. There were several accruals and events that the management of Shakespeare is considering to determine if they should be recognized or disclosed in Dec 31, 2011 F/S. In my opinion, the important things to focus on subsequent events are the period they effect and if their influence is material or not, so that in conclusion, the F/S are fairly presented.

The case of Marbury v. Madison centers on a case brought before the Supreme Court by William Marbury. Shortly after Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams in the election of 1800, Congress increased the number of circuit courts. Adams sought to fill these new vacancies with people who had Federalist backgrounds. To accomplish this, he used the powers granted under the Organic Act to issue appointments to 42 justices of the peace and 16 circuit court justices for the District of Columbia. Adams signed the appointments on his last day in office and they were subsequently sealed by Secretary of State John Marshall. However, many of the appointments were not delivered before Adams left office and Jefferson ordered the deliveries stopped

Judicial Activism- When judges deny legislators or the executive the power to do something unconstitutional.

1. Is Coconut’s February 1, 2012, arrangement with Buffett within the scope of ASC 985-605?

Jaime Caetano, resident of Massachusetts, had acquired a stun gun for her own safety. She had recently been in an abusive relationship and restraining orders did nothing to stop him, once they were separated. Police officers found her stun gun. She was then arrested, put on trial and convicted for owning a stun gun, since they are illegal to own in Massachusetts, Mass. Gen. Laws, ch. 140, §131J. But Caetano felt that her arrest violated her 2nd amendment rights.

In 2011, a homeless woman, Jaime Caetano, was severely beaten by her ex-boyfriend and was transported to a hospital. After she was released from the hospital, her friend gave her a stun gun to protect herself just in case any situation like this ever re-occurred. During a shoplifting incident later that year police found Caetano’s stun gun inside of her purse, she told officers she had it to defend herself from her ex-boyfriend against who she had restraining orders. Caetano now has found herself in the highest court in Massachusetts, at the center of a second amendment case. The Supreme Judicial Court is being asked to determine if the state’s law infringes on a person’s second amendment right to bare arms. They are also being asked whether or not the rule stating “you have the right to defend yourself in your own home”, applies to a homeless person.