Litigation Filed For Public Interest Litigation

Erin Brokovich was presented with a check for $2 million for all her efforts, and continues to work on cases involving peoples who have been victimized by large corporations.

This claim arises out of a lawsuit filed by Plaintiff, Debra Nathan-Nenn, on her own behalf, and on behalf of her minor son, Grey Hoffman. The Amended Complaint alleges in general that Ms. Nathan-Nenn executed a written lease to rent a house from the insureds starting on June 1, 2013. The plaintiffs further allege that starting on the day the plaintiffs took possession of the house, the drain in the kitchen sink was not working and the insureds failed to correct this condition. The complaint continues to allege additional deficiencies in the rental property such as mold growth in one of the bedrooms and in various locations of the house due to excess moisture and failure to patch exterior openings, insufficient heating, holes in the exterior walls, an unfinished deck, insufficient weather sealants, vermin in the crawlspace, frozen pipes and lack of running water. The plaintiffs further allege that the insureds have failed to address and resolve the above issues. The most serious claim is that the mold present throughout the house caused the plaintiff and her minor son to become ill.

Civil Law: about a party bringing an action for a personal remedy of some kind.

Resolved: On balance, the Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission is undemocratic.

Joeli Rosario is and has been a resident of the City of San Francisco, County of San Francisco. Her current address is: 1418, South Van Ness Avenue. The Connie’s Costume Shop is a sole proprietorship organized and existing under the laws of the State of California with its principal office located at 1685 Bryant Street, San Francisco, CA 941103.

The movie a Civil Action covers the Woburn Case which was Anne Anderson and other small families who decided to sue the companies Beatrice Foods and W.R. Grace. The reason for Anderson and the other families to decide to sue was because they believe the companies dumping of poisonous chemicals was the reason to their children’s leukemia deaths. However, when they reached out to Jan Schlichtmann to handle their case he was not the most positive on wanting to help them, “Ms. Anderson, our firm is very small, three attorneys that's it, which means we can only take on so many cases at once and we have to be very careful on the ones we do take because we can't afford to lose, our clients pay nothing, we pay everything, and the only we get paid back

the court case Maryland, Petitioner v. James Kulbicki, James Kulbicki fatally shot his 22-year-old-mistress. Kulbicki shot his mistress on the weekend before he was scheduled for a hearing on unpaid child support, which was tied into a paternity suit between Kulbicki and his mistress. At Kulbicki’s trial, which began in 1995, evidence was presented that the bullet removed from the head of Kulbicki’s mistress matched the bullet fragment that was left in Kulbicki’s truck. FBI Agent Ernest Peele, who represented the CBLA (Comparative Bullet Lead Analysis), presented this evidence. Peele also examined a bullet taken from Kulbicki’s gun. Even though the bullet in the victim’s brain was not an “exact” match to the bullet found in the gun, Peele assumed that the bullet from the gun was similar enough to the first two bullets found. Using

The Founding Fathers tried to protect citizen’s rights to religious choice and attempted to keep the government form religious interference. The purpose was not to disallow religion but to give the people a choice of whom and where to worship. Today, the views are not the same. Freedom of religion is being interpreted as freedom of religion as long as it is acceptable with everyone else. The Founding Fathers also wanted separation of church and state to protect the church from government interference. The concept has now become removal of religion from all aspects of government. The cases of Van Orden v. Perry and McCreary County v. ACLU are two prime examples, both with different results.

Issue: Do warrantless arrest and no probable cause determination allow for Police to detain a suspect for an extended amount of time?

The sixth and fourteenth amendment both protect rights having to do with due process and right to counsel.

The California Supreme Court will review the decision made by California Court of Appeals regarding Gerard v. Orange Coast Memorial. The case is regarding providing meal breaks for hospital employees scheduled for long shifts. The meal-break suit outlines the dispute over whether or not an Industrial Welfare Commission order that allows health care workers to waive meal periods provided during long shifts actually conflicts with state law.

And finally when the congress or Federal Court give a legal pressure to the rights of some individual or groups like positive action for women or Aborinigal land right that action is also refers to policy.

A Civil Action is based upon a true story that Jonathan Harr, a former staff writer of New England Monthly describes a case that in the legal system that is fascinating and compelling. The story of a impracticable quest by an idealistic young personal-Injury lawyer, whose aim was to prove that two conglomerates, Beatrice Foods and W.R Grace, allegedly polluted the water in Woburn ,Mass. a Boston suburb, with carcinogens. Jan had hoped that a victory would send a message to the boardrooms to America and felt that the culture of Leukemia in Woburn guaranteed his success. He never realized that he would be comforted with problems in the justice system.

With Article 6, a person is guaranteed to the right to a fair and public hearing in the determination of an individual’s civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him. The ECtHR in case laws has broadly

Most social movements in India since the 1970s have actively used the Courts-especially the Supreme Court-as a part of their struggles. This has been possible because of the higher Courts’ activism, especially under the guidance and action of Public Interest Litigation. Through the instrument of Public Interest Litigation, the Court liberated itself from traditional constraints in the legal system so as to reach out ‘to the weaker sections of Indian humanity.