The Driscoll Case

In United States v. Drayton, Christopher Drayton and Clifton Brown were traveling on a public bus, when police officers boarded the bus as part of a routine interdiction effort. As one of the officers walked through the bus, he did not inform the passengers of their rights to refuse or cooperate. As Drayton and Brown were asked by officers to provide ID, and officers declared that they were searching for drugs and weapons and asked if they could search their bags, and person. Brown agreed and a pat-down revealed hard objects similar to drug packages in both thigh areas. When Drayton agreed, a pat-down revealed similar objects. Both were arrested, and the District Court determined that the police conduct was not coercive and Drayton and Brown's

The court ordered the deferents to pay $1.6 million in reparations under the Fair Housing Act. Vanita Gupta, the Principal Deputy Assistance Attorney General, said, “Today [7 March 2016] reaffirms that America guarantees all people equal protection and fair treatment, regardless of their religious beliefs. When communities deny their residents critical services simply because of where they worship, they violate our laws and threaten the defining values of religious freedom and tolerance that are the foundation of our country (United).” The verdict provides an precedent for suing the FLDS and other discriminatory religious

Should the Plaintiffs really get the $1.3 million ordered by the Courts? Should they be awarded any money for their “other cost and losses”?

Tim Morgan hit Michael Kramer with a foam hand after a verbal argument at a Patriots/Steelers professional football game in Foxborough, MA. The actions of Mr. Morgan caused Mr. Kramer to fall down the bleachers and sustain injuries. Mr. Morgan is facing charges of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon.

In pages 172 – 256 David R. Dow takes the reader into his life as he attempts to save Ezekiel Green from being executed. In an attempt to prove greens innocence, Dow decided to have green take a polygraph test. Greens results from the polygraph test shows he is telling the truth that he takes partial responsibility for the Quakers murders. He claims he did hire someone to kill a person but he killed the wrong family, that family being the Quakers. Dow and his team decided to send an appeal to the Supreme Court for them to wait on making a decision on Greens case until there’s a ruling in the Alabama vs. Nelson case. Dow’s team lost the appeal, and decided to issue a en banc reconsideration, in attempt to save Greens life. Dow were later informed

The City also sued accounting firms CliftonLarsonAllen and Janis Card Associates, for their rolls as auditors that were unable to detect any red flags in the work Crundwell was doing. Dixon also sued Fifth Third Bank for allowing Crundwell to open an account without proper documentation. After settling these lawsuits for “payments of $35.15 million from accounting firm CliftonLarsonAllen, $3.85 from Fifth Third Bank and $1 million from the accounting firm of Janis Card Associates and owner Samuel Card”(Jenco 9/25/13). After all of this the city was able to recover about 70% of their loss, and are now looking at how they invest this money so this story will have a happy ending for the citizens of

Joshua and his mother filed a complaint against the DSS, which alleged that the DSS deprived Joshua DeShaney of his liberty without due process, which would be violating his rights under the 14th amendment, by failing to protect him against his father’s abuse which they knew of or should have known of yet didn’t intervene. The district court and the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the respondents’. They held that the Due Process Clause doesn’t require the state to protect its citizens from “private violence or other mishaps not attributable to the conduct of its employees” (DeShaney v. Winnebago). By doing this, the Court of Appeals was overturning several precedents, including Estate of Bailey by Oare v. County of York (1985) and Jensen v. Conrad (1984) which held that once the State has knowledge that a child is in danger of abuse and actually takes action to protect him/her from that danger, a “special relationship” emerges between the State and the child thus imposing a constitutional duty to provide adequate protection. Furthermore, in relation to Martinez v. California, the “casual connection” between the DSS’ conduct and Joshua’s injuries was too diminished to establish a deficiency in his constitutional rights. The Court of Appeals therefore found it unnecessary to answer whether the respondents’ conduct showed the “state of mind” needed to make a due process claim after the precedents set in place by Daniels v. Williams and Davidson v. Cannon.

The impacts of DeShaney v. Winnebago are used in cases of psychiatric patients and many other child abuse cases. In the context of psychiatric patients, two Supreme Court cases lead the legal precedent on how psychiatric cases are followed through: The case of Youngberg v. Romeo, which held that the government takes on affirmative duties in involuntarily confining a mental health patient, and also the case of DeShaney v. Winnebago, which lessened the range of affirmative duties given to the government (Hagan 735). Although DeShaney v. Winnebago protected social workers, it also created a more difficult space for child abuse cases to actually be carried out. For example, Jessica Gonzales tried to steer around the DeShaney v. Winnebago case when her husband murdered their three kids despite Jessica’s multiple reports of his

In 2013 Wesley Joseph Wingo, his wife Linda and their son Andrew Wingo, all plead guilty to varying counts of money laundering and misprision related to a five year federal investigation into the misappropriation of funds from the non-profit Angel Food Ministries. During this investigation federal agents uncovered evidence that the Wingo family made personal purchases using funds donated to the organization. According to Justice News,

Last August, HCC Trustee Dave Wilson filed a complaint against Chancellor Cesar Maldonado for what he called “Fraud/Misappropriation of Bond Funds” due to “misstatements [that] resulted in excess money being paid for the property.”

This court case is in regard to the rock group, “The Slants”. The lead singer of the group, Simon Tam, decide to choose this moniker, because it was intended to regain the term’s meaning, and remove the negative connotation associated with the word. Tam’s intention was to the shift the moniker away from being a derogatory term towards Asian persons. Moreover, Tam attempted to gain federal registration of the moniker through The Patent and Trademark Office. However, the PTO denied the application. The office used the Lanham Act provision, which states trademarks that disparage any individual deal or alive from being registered. The case moved to the Federal Court. Here, the trademark was denied once again under the Disparagement Clause. Continuing on, the en banc Federal Circuit then found the disparagement clause to be unconstitutional on the grounds of the Free Speech Clause protected in the First

Facts: the Plaintiff, Micheal Huffington, is a former Congressman and a good investment experience. He describes himself as a conservative investor. On July 4, 2006, he learned of Carlyle and was introduced to its “founder, principal, and managing agent,” David Rubenstein with whom he discussed Carlyles’ investments. The latter described Carlyle as a firm that invests in “private-equity.” Being as a conservative investor, Huffington initially expressed his reservations about investing in private equity-based funds.” Rubenstein assured him that he would look for low risk investment products that would fit in with Huffington’s conservative philosophy.

In a strange turn of events, District Attorney Orvil Loge told News Channel 4 that he is dropping the charges against Wah. In addition, he is giving the Christian band manager a US$53,000 check to spend for the charities he was raising cash for.

While reading this post I was wondering the same thing as some of the members. How did Dokos pay the restitution? It makes me suspicious that they transferred Dokos to another church after the first investigation. They found the money to be honoraria, but it seem like me the church still did not trust him enough. This is a huge red flag and everyone should have been weary.

After varios online publications reported that the Gates Foundation started a series of U.S. class-action litigation claiming that years of corruption, including bribery, inflated the value of more than $98 billion of its stock and bonds as a "pervasive bribery and money laundering scheme". The foundation allegedly would be suing Petrobras indenpendly, suggesting this may be the best way to recover most of its losses of shares traded in the US (ADRs).