Improper Venue Case Study

Throughout the course of this investigation, the following courthouse was researched to locate any all court documentation for Dennis Baker and Charlotte Baker, as the search was expanded to include Shawna Thornton’s affiliation with the Bakers’.

5) Decide whether or not jurisdiction is proper based on purposeful availment in the forum state and whether the court of appeals should appeal or reverse the district’s court ruling.

Further the Notice to Defendant contained information about when Johnson was due in court for an unrelated matter, as well as notice as to how to obtain representation from a public defender. Additionally, the Continuity of Care form appeared to be issued by a detention facility, identified Johnson as an inmate, and contained several boxes where entries may be made regarding numerous medical conditions. Finally, the OPD was an information document that appeared to be issued by the Office of the public defendant which contained several advisements relating to the criminal justice system, and the process by which one may obtain the services of a public defender. All three of these documents were admitted at trial against

The trial court erred and abused its discretion in granting the State’s motion to admit evidence of prior uncharged incidents of domestic violence, because the evidence denied Mr. Davis of his rights to due process of law as guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, and Article I, Section 10 of the Missouri Constitution, in that the evidence was more prejudicial than probative because it was too remote in time to be relevant to the charged crimes and had a prejudicial effect.

While at GPM, I attended a session of Treatment Accountability Court (“TAC”) (formerly Mental Health Court) and DUI/Drug Court. Both Courts operate similarly. Several hours before the court session, members of the legal community meet to discuss the progress of each participate scheduled to appear that day. Legal representatives include members from the Sheriff’s Office, Solicitor General’s Office, Public Defender’s Office, the judge who presides over the proceeding, a Program Coordinator & Counselor, a misdemeanor probation officer, and a felony probation officer. The group discusses the status of each participate and whether they’re meeting the conditions set forth by the court. The programs are conducted in phases,

Now comes the Defendant, Joseph Bettina, files this Motion For temporary Support and would shows:

Plaintiff Randy Law, for his cause of action against Defendant Piper Reed complains and alleges as follows:

I returned Ms Dunlap call. She said wants to place a formal complaint against the CPS worker Miranda Larson because she illegally removed her children based on false accusations. She stated that Miranda, like the entire CW are doing criminal activities. She then asked me if I had talked to her attorney? What was my conversation about, What did I disclose to them? What did they told me about her? "Be honest" she said. I informed her that I do contact her attorney because in one her DHS 0170 form the Discrimination Complaint form, she provided us her attorney's phone number and my conversation was about how can we contact her. She said that we should not be talking to her attorney because she just fired her.

Would filing a diversity jurisdiction lawsuit in federal district court in the Southern District of Florida result in Rule 11, 28 U.S.C. §1927, or some other violations when the defendant resides in Minnesota? It depends. It depends on whether the court will exercise discretion to sanction. The court would likely to sanction Ms. Rodriguez’s lawyer under Rule 11 and 28 U.S.C. §1927 due to the motives of “home court” advantage and to inconvenience Paulsen. Ms. Rodriguez has meet subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction can be waived by Paulsen as can venue, and the choice of law would be Minnesota state law since the contract was created and breached in Minnesota.

Plaintiff's claims regarding his ability to mail documents bears upon his constitutional right of access to the courts. Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 821 (1977). While prisoners have a constitutionally protected right of access to the courts:

In this instant appeal, Mr. Shoemaker asserts that the circuit court erred by imposing an improper purge provision after finding him to be in contempt, and that the circuit court erred in finding that Mr. Shoemaker would be liable for alimony payments in accordance with the parties’ original separation agreement. We shall address both of these arguments in turn.

In the wake of the highly controversial and newly-proposed rule clarifying the Environmental Protection Agency’s and Army Corps of Engineers’ interpretations of the phrase “waters of the United States,” the Supreme Court was recently asked to determine whether or not Jurisdictional Determinations issued by the Corps constitute “final agency action” under the Administrative Procedure Act. Such a distinction is important, because if considered “final agency action”, such determinations would be subject to judicial review. Under the Clean Water Act’s “arguably unconstitutionally vague” definition of “waters of the United States,” the exact scope of jurisdiction is murky at best. The indefinite scope of jurisdiction that CWA imparts has been criticized as expanding the Corps’ and EPA’s jurisdiction so vastly, it caused Justice Scalia to speculate that “[a]ny piece of land that is wet at least part of the year is in danger of being classified by [Federal] employees as wetlands covered by the Act . .

Per the order received, the court suspended this case effective 1/11/17, with the NCP order to pay $350.00 per month on arrearage owed as of the suspension date.Fiscal reviewed case accounts; case overcharged by six months at the rate of $449.00 per month. . Therefore, the WC account balance was adjusted to $0.00 and the WA account balance was adjusted to $17,215.13. Caseworker A. Brant submitted the fiscal request.

1. Negligence / Personal Injury - 2 Years with Modified Discovery Rule (knew or should have known injury was wrongfully caused even if plaintiff did not know it was actionable). (statutes of limitations).

For the mock trial I was assigned to be one of the prosecuting attorneys. After being presented with case materials which included facts of the case, statements from both prosecuting and defense witnesses, penal code for the alleged charges, and map of the crime scene, we as a group decided to create one Google Drive document. There we would upload our parts of the case and help other group members with their assignments.