Case: Bill Mclaren Jr. V. Microsoft Corporation

In the case of Robert Tolan and Marian Tolan vs. Jeffrey Wayne Cotton, I will be discussing what interest me about this case. I will also deliberating on the liability and criminal liability of this case. The Tolan vs. Cotton case interests me because the United States have so many police that are brutalizing citizens. In some cases the police officers are getting away with it. After reading, reviewing, and studying this case I have learn a lot about the criminal system and laws that men and women should obey. I will explain how the nine judges on the Supreme courts all came to a verdict against the police officer Jeffrey Cotton after he shot an innocent suspect. This people

Jan Hughes, Plaintiff-Appellant v, Boston Scientific corporation, Defendant-Apellee., 631F .3d 762 (2011), United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit (January 21, 2011)

The parties in this lawsuit are: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) (plaintiff) and Mims Distributing Company, Inc (defendant), the EEOC is the plaintiff on behalf of Christopher Alston (Lally, 2015). Christopher Alston was a potential employee of the Mims Distributing Company, Inc.

Facts: This is a Title VII action alleging harassment based on national origin and religion. The facts are set forth in the light most favorable to Rafiq. On May 11, 2001, Mohommed Rafiq was hired as a car salesman. Rafiq was born in India and is a practicing Muslim. The alleged harassment began on September 11, 2001. When he arrived for work that afternoon, his co-workers were watching news coverage of the terrorist attacks and one of them asked him in a mocking way, "Where have you been?", as if to infer that he had participated in the attacks.

The case involving Birch & Davis International, Inc., and Warren M. Christopher, the United States Secretary of State was decided on September 13th, 1993. The case involved procurement procedures conducted by the Agency of International Development (Open Jurist). The issue centered on exclusion of bids made by Birch & Davis International, Inc. Birch challenged the exclusion to the General Services Administration Board of Contract Appeals and they decided that the actions taken by the agency were fair. The case got to the Federal level when Birch appealed the decision by the board.

The facts of this issues is that there has been in some cases of hairstyle based discrimination within the work place. Looking at the case of EEOC v. Mims Distributing Company, Inc., in regards to Christopher Alston, an African American man. This case was a hairstyle based discrimination, however it was based on the company not having a policy to addressed hairstyle as a religious practice. The outcome of this case ended with Mims Distributing Company paying $50,000 and adopting a formal religious accommodation policy that will address future issues (Lally, 2015). Another case based on hairstyle discrimination would be Farryn Johnson v. Hooters. Ms. Johnson, an African American was awarded more than $250,000 after an arbitrator found that racial discrimination did in fact contributed to her getting fired (CHUCK, 2015). Hooters prohibits only African-American Hooters Girls from wearing blond highlights in their hair, other women were allowed to wear blond highlight in their hair (CHUCK, 2015). Johnson was told by the manager that blond streaks didn 't look natural on African Americans (CHUCK, 2015). However, on the other hand cases that are similar to Chasity Jones, an African American woman, who was initially hired to work for Catastrophe Management Systems but notified later that the job was withdrawn because of her hairstyle, which were dreadlocks, was not found guilty of discrimination (Wellington, 2016). However, every case is not like the other case because

Kelley acquired employment as a mattress salesman at Bed-Mart in January 2000. Upon employment, all sales personnel must sign a convent which includes both confidentiality provision - not and non complete provisions. In July 2000, Kelly ended his employment at Bed-Mart and began to work at Sleep America.

The court decided that their needed to be further proceedings for Maureen Davis under negligence and the Alabama State law of having sufficient evidence against Hardees restaurant under Flagstar who didn’t have a strong enough backing or argument to defend that fact that there

Johnathan Harr wrote a book in 1996 that was then made into a movie titled, “A Civil Action”, that tells the true story about the case, Anne Anderson v. et al., v. Cryovac Inc., which seems straight forward, but instead evolves into a labyrinth lawsuit. Jan Schlichtmann, the main character, who is played by John Travolta, is a successful and tenacious lawyer who founded his own law practice. He's a bachelor with a nice car, a nice house, and a career that has earned him huge rewards. However, for Jan and his firm, deciding to take on one particular case, with a chance to make huge money on, could change their lives forever.

The Plaintiffs, family of the decedent plaintiff, Barbara J. O’Neil, filed a wrongful death complaint due to mesothelioma against the defendant manufacturers, Crane Co. et al., in concerns of valves and pumps manufactured for use on Navy warships. This particular claim raised strict liability claims and negligence claims in regards to asbestos exposure experienced by the decedent

MILLERSBURG — Holding on to his claims of innocence, a Killbuck man convicted of sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl learned he could spend the rest of his days in prison.

Plaintiff does not need assistance from the Defendant for suit monies nor does the Defendant have the ability to pay for her attorney.

The case against Microsoft was brought buy the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as several state Attorneys General. Microsoft is accused of using and maintaining monopoly power to gain an unfair advantage in the market. The case has been under observation for a long time, but the Justice department is having trouble coming up with substantial evidence against Microsoft. Specifically, the Department must prove:That Microsoft has monopoly power and is using it to gain unfair leverage in the market.And that Microsoft has maintained this monopoly power through "exclusionary" or "predatory" acts(Rule).Some say that Microsoft is only taking advantage of its position in the market and using innovative marketing strategies

In summary, in the case of CompuServe v. Patterson, the court inaccurately applied the senses of personal jurisdiction. “The use of the Internet to conduct business is constantly expanding. It gives the parties an opportunity to transfer information quickly and inexpensively. Business that once required face-to-face contact can now be accomplished between persons who have never set foot in the jurisdiction of the party with which they are contacting” (Conner). The services that CompuServe offers from their website are consistent in terms of being passive, which primarily provides information for the development of shareware to be distributed globally, and no time provides sufficient contact for jurisdiction. CompuServe simply provides interactive

Defendant PepsiCo conducted a promotional campaign in Seattle, Washington from October 1995 to March 1996. The promotion, titled "Pepsi Stuff," attempted to persuade consumers into collecting numerous "Pepsi Points" in order to redeem them for merchandise featuring the Pepsi logo. During this campaign, PepsiCo launched a promotional commercial intended for the ‘Pepsi Generation,' in order to gain the largest possible response to help push their campaign. One such commercial shows a well dressed teenager preparing for school simultaneously advertising a t-shirt, leather jacket and sunglasses for various reasonable point values. As the scene