Facepunch Case Summary

Jurisdiction played a key role in the outcome of the lawsuit in A Civil Action. The plaintiff’s lawyer, Jan Schlichtmann, filed the original complaint against W. R. Grace and Beatrice Foods in state court. Schlichtmann, a personal injury attorney, spends most of his time there; personal injury is heard much less frequently in federal court. William Cheeseman, the attorney for W. R. Grace, almost immediately removes the case to federal court since W. R. Grace’s headquarters is in New York and the amount in question is clearly over

II. “Judge Pirtle should recuse himself from presiding in this case, because the State intends to call Judge Pirtle as a witness, concerning the qualifications and credibility of Dr. Ralph Erdmann, the pathologist who performed the autopsy in this capital murder case.” (http://www.goextranet.net/Seminars/Examples/Disqualify/State%27sRecuseJudge.htm)

Procedural posture: The case is before the Northern District of New York after the plaintiff, Howard I. Ginsburg, filed an amended petition as the administrator of the estate of his deceased son, Bradley Marc Ginsburg, asking that the City of Ithaca and Cornell University be held negligent for Bradley’s wrongful death as well as personal injuries and conscious pain and suffering.

Personal jurisdiction isn’t the only thing that the courts will look at it. They will also look at minimum contacts. Minimum contact is a nonresident defendant with the forum state that is sufficient for jurisdiction over the defendant to be proper. A lack of minimum contacts violates the nonresident defendant’s constitutional right to due process and “offends traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice” (Inm, 1992) (Min, 2001-2016).

When considering the facts of the Margolin’s lawsuit with the rules of jurisdiction, first one must understand when personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction would be applicable. As stated in the textbook, “Personal Jurisdiction is a court 's power to render a decision affecting the rights of the specific persons before the court. Generally, a court 's power to exercise in personam jurisdiction extends only over a specific geographic region.” (Kubasek, pg.42, 2009). Before a court can decide to implement control over a person, they require a minimum contact within the district in which the court is over. In this case, the minimum contact was established over the internet when Margolin inputted information over the internet that completed the business transaction. Since the contact is through the internet, and not within boundaries of the state of California or Florida, the court can exercise personal jurisdiction Margolin’s lawsuit over Funny Face and Novelty Now (Kubasek, 2009).

Determining the best court for this lawsuit for Funny Faces Donald Margolin should first consider the following his personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, and his minimum contact. Personal jurisdiction deals with the power, the power the court 's has over the parties involved in a certain case. It applies to this certain case because Margolin is suing for his rights because his face turned blue after using Funny Faces after shave cream. On the other hand subject matter jurisdiction is the courts power to hear a certain case. This basically determines what courts will be involved in what case. The importance of subject matter jurisdiction is crucial in this case because Donald Margolin is trying to get his case heard by the right court in order for justice to be served. Margolin doesn’t want to have a lack of subject matter jurisdiction which can cause his case to be dismissed. Margolin case may fall under one of the three jurisdictions which are exclusive federal jurisdiction, state jurisdiction, and concurrent jurisdiction. Very few case falls under exclusive jurisdiction such as bankruptcy cases, admiralty cases, and cases dealing with federal copyright. State jurisdiction deals with more cases that is not involved with the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal court system. State court also deals with cases involving adoption and divorce. Concurrent jurisdiction on the other hand means that both state and federal court have jurisdiction over a case. If a case

COMES NOW, Defendant, Martin Katz, by and through his attorneys M. David Stallings, Esquire, Bryant S. Green, Esquire, and Niles, Barton & Wilmer, LLP, hereby files this Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion to Dismiss Count 1 of Counter Complaint, and in support thereof states as follows:

the safety of he and his family after representing the state in a serious criminal case, posted a

The case involved with a plaintiff Clinch, the director of heartland regional’s cardiac surgery and defendant Nellestein, director of the hospital’s vascular surgery. The claimant was terminated from the hospital due to poor performance, and increase rate of surgery complication. The plaintiff appeal the decision reached by the circuit court, and requested for the appeal court to consider his case based on the evidence he had presented. The plaintiff argue that the defendant was behind his termination, and the contract he had with the hospital would have existed if the defendant would not have interfered. Likewise, the plaintiff also alleged that the defendants revoke the rules that could have allowed the claimants to perform voluntarily service in the hospital without necessary having a regular contract with them. On the other hand, the defendant argue that the hospital breaches its contract from the claimant because they have the right to do it if they wish. Due to that, he was not the one behind the claimant’s termination of contract from

The outcome of the case was that it was submitted to the jury on the theory of breach of contract and misrepresentation (“Case Briefs”). The jury that was on this case found liability on both counts and awarded $200,000 in compensatory damages and $250,000 in punitive damages against each newspaper for misrepresentation. The Court of Appeals set aside the misrepresentation damages, but affirmed the compensatory damages. The State Supreme Court affirmed the setting aside of punitive damages. Also, decided that the compensatory damages were not enforceable under standard breach of contracts theory. In regards to the Supreme Court, it found that, in a majority decision, that against respondent’s claims that it had no jurisdiction. They cited the Orr v Orr case of 1979 of whether the arguments in

After I enjoyed meeting with you and learning more about the position, the job seems to be a great match for my skills and background. The interview reinforced my interest in becoming a part of the team of Workers’ Compensation.

Other: Like I mentioned before I am very dedicated to what ever I apply to. I know that on new servers that just open the support rooms are slow so I will be working on moving people/ helping people in the support rooms. The support rooms get very crazy and uncontrollable at some points so I will try to take of the pressure of your hands.

According to Lopez v. Shpigel et al (Phila Ct, 2007), the judge ordered that the case may only proceed on the issue of vicarious liability. However, that was not part of the initial allegation made by the plaintiff. It appears to me that the judge was giving counsel to the plaintiff. Perhaps this is a misinterpretation, however,

Full stack developer with a passion for automating things. Experienced implementing a fully automated CI, CD Dev Pipeline using open source technologies such as Jenkins, Git and Ansible. Capable of quickly learning and mastering new technologies; equally successful in both team and self-directed settings. Experience deploying and provisioning on premise infrastructure and AWS Cloud

I am asking The COURT to order my former husband, James Michael Newman, known as and