Case Analysis CLARK v. MISSOURI, KANSAS & TEXAS RAILWAY COMPANY, Appellant. SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI, DIVISION ONE 179 Mo. 66; 77 S.W. 882; 1903 Mo. LEXIS 394 1. Provide a summary of the undisputed facts. On May 10, 1897, a train wrecked on Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railroad near Marthasville, Missouri. This train transported live animals. A conductor of the train informed a railroad track foreman that there was an accident and some steers were loose in the area and they needed to be recovered. This section of the railroad was serviced by a crew that included a track foreman Otto Housman (the defendant) and three trackmen – Housman’s two sons named Jim and George Housman, and Pleasant W. Clark (the plantiff). Mr. …show more content…
After that, Mr. Housman called on section gangs to come help him clean the mess and bring the cattle into pens. After they penned the cattle Mr. Housman ordered the others, including Mr. Clark, to find the last one and bring him back. He thinks that before the group left he called after them to be careful, but was not sure if they heard. The Foreman testified that the conductor came to him and told him of the accident and told him to be careful because they might hurt him. FELA also applies to the defendant because he is an employee of the railroad and the law also covers him as well. Chapter 2 of Federal Employee Labor Act Sec 51 is cited in part: Liability of common carriers by Railroad, in interstate or foreign countries, for injuries to employees from negligence; employee defined. “Common carriers …shall be liable in damages to any person suffering injury while he is employed by such carrier in such commerce…resulting in whole or in part from the negligence of any of the officers or agents or employees of such carrier, or by reason of any defect or insufficiency, due to its negligence, in its cars, engines, appliances, machinery, track, roadbed, works, boats, wharfs or other equipment.” It is assumed that all work environments are safe to work in, however, there are certain risks connected to specific jobs such as the one that Mr. Clark had as a section hand with the railroad, especially when
The 8th amendment states, “ Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Which brings me to the case of Thompson vs. Oklahoma. The debate is on whether or not capital punishment should be given to minors. On one hand, some may argue that Thompson should have been charged with capital punishment because “his acts were heinous and cruel” (Pearson Prentice Hall: n.d.). On the other hand, others such as Oklahoma argue that it is a violation of the 8th amendment under “cruel and unusual punishment.” This creates the argument of Thompson vs. Oklahoma.
The right to a speedy trial is considered an essential part of the due process applicable against the states because of the decision in the case of Klopfer v. North Carolina (1967) and ultimately the inclusion of it within the fourteenth amendment, that was granted by the doctrine of selective incorporation. In this particular case, the defendant Klopfer appealed to the supreme court because his trial had been postponed to be brought up again in the future when desired. Klopfer claimed that the right to a speedy trial, granted by the Sixth Amendment, should be pertinent to a state’s criminal prosecution due to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (Ingram, 2009). The case was examined by the supreme court who ruled that the right to a speedy trial is a crucial basic right, just as the other rights guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, that has been around for a very long time (Steinberg, 1975).
The case of Kent V. United States is a historical case in the United States. The Kent case helped lead the way in the development of a list of eight criteria and principles. This creation of these criteria and principle has helped protect the offender and public for more than forty-five years. Which as a reason has forever changed the process of waving a juvenile into the adult system (Find Law, 2014).
The appellant of the Cruzan v. Missouri case was the parents of Nancy Cruzan, Joe Cruzan and Joyce Cruzan. The Cruzans argued that when they made the decision to hook Nancy up to a feeding and hydration tube they were unaware that Nancy would be in the vegetative state permanently, they thought she would make it (Cruzan by Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved December 8, 2015, from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1989/88-1503).
The job for which Sheila White was hired was by her own admission too tough for her to perform.
The struggle for equality has existed throughout history. The color of a person’s skin seems to depict everything about them. Not only was this an issue in earlier times, but the present as well. The battle to overcome inequity was made significantly more troublesome in the Plessy v. Ferguson case of 1896.
Going against the Supreme Court, which is the supreme law of the land, in the Worcester vs Georgia case demonstrates how Andrew Jackson abused his power as president. John Marshall, the chief justice at the time, ruled that the United States did not have possession or legal jurisdiction over Native American land, and no individual states had authority in Native American affairs. However, Jackson went above this, since the court did not order marshals to enforce it. In the Indian Removal packet, it was stated that in May 1830, Jackson signed the Indian removal act to exchange land with Native Americans. To do this, he coerced tribe leaders, sometimes by getting them drunk or high, into signing away their land through removal treaties. In the
Case Facts: Roy Caballes was stopped for speeding by an Illinois state trooper Daniel Gillette. During the traffic stop another state trooper Craig Graham of the Illinois State Police Drug Interdiction Team, overheard the stop on the radio and showed up to the scene with a narcotics detection dog. While the first trooper was writing Roy Caballes a warning ticket for speeding the second trooper walked around Roy’s car with the narcotics detection dog. The dog alerted that it had detected narcotics at the rear end of the car which subsequently led to the state troopers searching the trunk of the car. Upon searching the trunk of the car the state troopers found a large quantity of marijuana which consequently led to the arrest of Roy Caballes. The entire incident lasted no longer than 10 minutes. Roy Caballes was convicted of a narcotics offence and was sentenced to 12 years in prison and ordered to pay a $256,136 fine.
In the Case of Missouri v. Seibert, a mother named Patrice Seibert was convicted of second degree murder. Patrice Seibert had a son named Jonathan who was twelve years old and had cerebral palsy. Jonathan Seibert suddenly died in his sleep, and his mother thought that she would be held responsible for his sudden death. Ms. Seibert then devised a plan with her two older sons and their friends. She wanted to cover up the death of Jonathan, so she conspired with her sons and their friends to cover up the death by burning down their mobile home. Donald Rector was a mentally ill individual who stayed with the Seibert’s and later died as the home went up in flames. Several days later, Seibert was taken into the police station and questioned about the mysterious mobile home fire. While being interrogated, the officer waved Ms. Seibert’s Miranda rights. She was questioned for thirty to forty minutes before she was given a break. While being questioned, the officer hoped that Ms. Seibert would voluntarily confess to the crimes that had taken place. After her break, she was then questioned a second time. This time, the officer turned on a recorder and then read Ms. Seibert her Miranda Warnings, and the officer also obtained a signed waiver of rights from Seibert.
Specific health problems associated with the workplace have contributed to the development of Particular health issues connected with the work environment have added to the advancement of the cutting edge safety and health development. These issues incorporate lung infections in diggers, mercury harming, and lung tumor attached to asbestos. Occupational and Environmental Health Professionals have an above normal extent of all day employments. For Occupational and Environmental Health Professionals working all day, normal week by week hours are 42.3 and profit are high - in the ninth decile. Unemployment for Health Professionals is underneath normal. H&S Professionals have an expansive extent of specialists amongst individuals in the 25-34 age section, making it an energetic and dynamic workplace. The unavoidable consequence of the expanded consideration given to safety and health is that bigger organizations are utilizing safety and health professionals and all organizations big or small are relegating these obligations to existing representatives.
Facts: In Lexington, Kentucky, police officers followed a suspected drug dealer to an apartment building where he went. When they arrived outside of the door to the apartment where the suspect was they reportedly could smell marajuana. The police then knocked and shouted they they were there and in return they could hear what sounded like people destroying the evidence and running around. The police then knocked down the door and saw the respondent as well as drugs laying out without having to look anywhere. later the police found more drugs and paraphernalia doing a more in-depth search. “The Circuit Court denied respondent’s motion to suppress the evidence, holding that exigent
Trinity County’s decision this week to nix a study that sought to test the feasibility of a rail line that would have purportedly ran from Eureka eastwards was a loss for business interest and a win for environmental interest, groups on either side claimed.
In criminal law the most significant body in history is the Supreme Court. It is known as the “highest court in the land”. The landmark cases heard by the court are carefully chosen by the esteemed justices. The choices are usually based on cases that will have significance to more than just the parties involved in the case. They look at cases that will have a wide range effect for the country, and cases that lower courts struggled to come to a conclusion about. The case that was chosen for this essay was Ohio v. Clark. In this report the case will be summarized as well as discussed as to merits of the case and the decisions of the court.
The court ruled that State could not sue for equitable indemnity or contribution based on the fact that there was no evidence that Moffatt owed a duty of care or that Moffatt was negligent. The court also determined that there was no contractual relationship between State and Major and that a person or other property was not damaged. Based on the two core findings, all cross complaints made by State are disregarded and State is found to be solely responsible for the damages. Moffatt is also awarded costs on the appeal.
On November 2, 1993 Duncan Connor, a self-described transient, entered the Union Pacific Railyard in Salt Lake City, Utah, looking for a place to read and relax. Once there, he positioned himself in an area where railroad employees would not see him. Fifteen minutes after his arrival, Mr. Connor was run over by a rail car. He sustained a catastrophic injury in which both of his arms were amputated. Connor sued Union Pacific for negligence in August 1995.