Court Case: David Franklin Vs. Parke-Davis

In this case, the appellant, the state of Tennessee made an appeal against the idea that a coach trainer had been negligent in the case of Michael Pinson who had a partial paralysis of his body due to a sports injury. Notable legal issues stand out of the case. In the story, Michael Pinson initially had a blow to his head during a football match practice. He, shortly thereafter, collapsed and remained in an unconscious state for 10 minutes. The athletic trainer examined the football player and uncovered facial palsy, which included symptoms such as unequal pupils and no response to either sound or pain. The school then rushed Piston to hospital, but a student trainer rather than the school trainer accompanied him. Besides, the trainer reported

“Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is what comes to mind when we are in court or thinking about the constitution. That was not the case in the Dred Scott V. Sanford decision because Dred Scott was African American and a slave suing for his freedom. Dred Scott was an early, persistent steadfast, fighter for African American civil rights. “The Dred Scott decision declares two propositions—first, that a Negro cannot sue the U.S. Courts; and secondly, that Congress cannot prohibit slavery in the Territories.” Dred Scott forced the Supreme Court to fully articulate its stance on slavery; the results of which had long standing effects. His case in the Supreme Court brought heated opinions from both the North and the South regarding states’ rights and slave rights. Both sides had a huge debate both regarding the issue using very valid arguments towards the Dred Scott case.

Facts: D was arrested for fleeing from police. charged w/ obstruction of justice and use of a deadly weapon. He pled guilty to lesser offenses and was sentenced to pay a fine. He was forced to take a delousing agent. W/ O touching the detainees, officers looks at all parts of the detainees. D alleges that he was told to lift his genitals, and cough while squatting. D was then admitted into the jail facility , released the next day, and the charges were dismissed.

In the book, Dred Scott v. Sandford, they discuss the Dred Scott case and the problems that arose from the case. Basically, the Supreme Court overreached its bounds in regards to the case it oversaw. The court was asked to decide on the fate of Dred Scott and his family in regards to their freedom. Instead, they overreached and decided on constitutionality of the Missouri Compromise and the overall citizenship of all those of African descent. This brought the matter of slavery to the forefront of everyone’s mind in America. It thoroughly destroyed the status quo of the North and South.

Following the death of Dr. Emerson, Dred Scott sued Mrs. Emerson in Missouri court because he desired his freedom. Under Dr. Emerson in Illinois, Dred had been a slave, but since him and his family currently lived in a state where slavery was banned, he rightfully deserved his freedom. Although the jury declared Scott free in 1850, Missouri reversed the law, claiming him as a slave under the law that Missouri governed, which remained a slave state at the time.

Nature of Case: The District Court condemned Antoine Jones of previous drug crimes. The defendant asked for an appeal and then then it headed D.C. Circuit of Appeals which they ended up reversing the condemnation. They stated that the no warrant use of the GPS violated the fourth amendment. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals refused a rehearing en banc. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari (review order of a higher court from previous court decision).

Duane Buck, a death row inmate, has served more than twenty one years for murdering his ex-girlfriend Debra Gardner and Kenneth Butler. He accused Kenneth for sleeping with Debra and also shot his stepsister in the chest, who survived. After shooting Kenneth, Gardner ran to the street and was chased until she was gunned down while her children watched. Even though the crime should be punished, bucks attorneys argue Mr. Buck was denied a fair trial. Walter Quijano, a psychologist, gave his testimony during the trial stating that Buck was more likely to be a future danger because of his racial color. What surprises everyone is that Buck’s defense lawyer was the one who called Quijano and evoke the testimony. Even though the racial testimony had no place in the trial it still didn’t justify whether they should throw out the death sentence. No racial testimony appeared to be in his early appeals due to his counsel’s impotence for introducing it. Still it was very believable because this was not the first case Quijano made a similar testimony that had violated an inmate’s constitutional rights. Bucks lawyers tried to use this information to fight for Buck but they were not successful because the courts ruled Buck had waited too long to raise the issue. The argument here is if Buck is

Supreme Court Case Sheppard V. Maxwell is the first case in American history to question whether the American right to a fair trial should be interrupted by the American right to freely publish one’s thoughts and opinions. Sheppard’s conviction, brought on by the biased eye of the press, was exonerated. However, concluded from the lack of policy alterations post-trial, the Sheppard V. Maxwell case still informally decided media is no real threat in the court system. Some may say otherwise. Although media may not directly affect court rulings, the press can certainly affect the public’s opinion, which in turn can affect a court case.

Throughout the United States history, there have been many decisions that could have both made and broken the establishment as we know it. One such case that hinges on that statement would be that of the United States V. Jones. The Government is your friend, if you haven’t done anything wrong then you have nothing to hide. Respondent Jones committed a crime that is a known fact. The police had a warrant and they acted on that warrant, although it had expired which was there own fault, they attached a GPS onto his wife’s car because he was smart when using his own car and his own cell phone. Talking in code and only driving from his house to work in his personal car.

Dred Scott was a Missouri slave who sued for his freedom on territory that outlawed slavery. This case was known as The Dred Scott vs. Stanford. Dred Scott was taken from the slave state, Missouri, to Illinois, which was a free state. Slavery was outlawed in Illinois because of the Missouri Compromise. In 1846, When Scott’s master, Dr. John Emerson died, Scott sued Ms. Emerson for freedom for himself and his family. On March 6, 1857,The Supreme Court denied Scott his freedom. Authors, Brands, Breem, Williams, and Gross (2009) found that Chief Justice Rodger B. Taney argued, “ No African American-slave or free could be a citizen of the United States” (The Dredd Scott Case pg. 323). According to The Dred Scott Decision Ushistory.org (2008) The court ruled; the Missouri Compromise was considered unconstitutional, the congress had no power to prohibit slavery, and that because Scott was black, he would not be considered a citizen in the United state, therefore, he could not bring suit (The Dred Scott Decision Ushistory.org, 2008, para. 2). The ruling was unfair due to five out of the six judges were proslavery

Dred Scott, an enslaved African American from Virginia, worked most of his life on a cotton plantation in Alabama owned by Army surgeon, Dr. John Emerson. Scott went along with his owners to Illinois and later out to the Wisconsin Territory, where the act of slavery was illegal. Later on, the family moved back to Missouri where the doctor eventually died. After this experience, Dred Scott, with the help of antislavery lawyers and his old owners, filed for his freedom. Scott felt that he was a free man due to him once living in a free area for four years. Years passed until one fateful day when Scott’s case reached the Supreme Court.

The defendant John Bass, alleged that the prosecution was seeking the death penalty against him because of the color of his skin and was granted a motion for discovery regarding the government's capital charging practices. The sixth circuit court found that Bass made a threshold showing evidence based on national statistics that "the United States charged blacks with a death-eligible offense more than twice as often as it charges whites." However, the Supreme Court reversed the Sixth Circuit, holding that a discriminatory effect could not be found because " raw statistics regarding overall charges say nothing about charges brought against similarly situated defendants."( United States v. Bass,536 U.S. 862 (2002) (per curiam)). The Supreme

The definition of the general term evidence is defined as “something (including testimony, documents, and tangible objects) that tends to prove or disprove the existence of an alleged fact” (Black’s Law Dictionary 9th ed., 2009). When I think of evidence I think of it as something that can be used to prove the truth of a crime. Examples of evidence could be witnesses, fingerprints, paperwork and much more. Evidence is basically anything and everything that can beat the case. Understanding and locating a case can be very difficult. Here is an example, U.S. Supreme Court in Davis v. Washington 547 U.S. 813, 165 L.Ed. 2d 224, 126 S.Ct. 2266 (2006). First be sure to understand that165 L.Ed. 2d 224 to find Davis v. Washington will provide you with

In 1959 a toll was ran to see the percentage of the total population living below the poverty line. The results were shocking, of the white population living in poverty it was 18.1%, and of the black population living in poverty it was 55.1%. The Civil Rights Movement of 1964 guaranteed the ending of "...segregation in public places and banned employment discrimination on the basis of race..." (Civil Rights Act- Black History). For thousands of years, segregation and inequality has been a problem. Some Supreme Court cases involved in the civil rights movement that contributed to the taking away of rights include Dred Scott VS. Stanford, Plessy VS. Ferguson, Shelley VS. Kramer.

When looking at the dilemma that appears in the case of Mary Beth versus William and Elizabeth Stern there is a moral and legal issue that arises. The judge was very broad in his ruling and was not able to put himself into the shoes of Mary Beth. When it comes to pregnancy, there is a connection that is established during the 9 months, between mother and child that is unexplainable and a maternal relationship that should not be broken. The morally right and just ruling would have been to give the child to the intended parents but allow Mary Beth, as the surrogate, visitation rights. The contract between the Stern family and Mary Beth implied that Mary Beth was doing a duty or a job and getting paid the equivalent of her duties. It stated that Mary Beth would