The Legal System And Ethics

“The Verdict” is a movie that deals with medical and legal ethics. Frank Gavin is an alcoholic who hasn’t won any of his cases in the past three years. Mickey, his former partner, gives him a medical malpractice case that is sure to settle for a large amount of money. The case of Deborah Ann Kay, a mother who was given anesthetic when she had just eaten inhaled her vomit and is now in a coma. The Donaheys, her sister and brother in law are hoping for a good settlement and Frank assures them that they have a strong case. While the case is going on he meets Laura, a woman at a bar who he falls in love with. Frank goes to visit Deborah Ann Kay in the hospital and is affected by her condition. He meets with the defendants who run the

One of the most important purposes of laws in the world is just to prevent that nothing bad happens to us, for example how a society could survive without traffic driving laws? It is impossible, we need to have rules that shows us the way we have to drive, the signs we need to respect, the light we need to observe, when to stop and when we should pass, and the consequences of breaking the laws.

Some of our first laws were taken from the 10 Commandments formed centuries ago. In their time the 10 Commandments were used to keep order among the Israelites and now in modern times we interpret them as the foundation for law. Laws were put in place to make a norm for society. Norms are the typical things that you do and are expected of you as a person. Commonly shared norms among a population are, but not limited to: waiting for the crosswalk signal to walk across the street, asking for help instead of “just doing your own thing”, and working to provide for yourself. Though when these norms we live by are established as laws some don’t agree, but still choose to follow them to blend with society. Societies view on topics often change over time as one extended movement, but following the law is something that has stuck around.

would be the result of not having laws? The world without law would be complete chaos. The majority of the people would say that we need laws. In order to keep everyone and everything safe, laws need to be set in place.

Imagine a world without law, surrounded by anarchism and people who can do whatever they please. A world without law would result in a corrupt and unfair society, ruled by the authoritative elite. In the narrative, To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, law is a major theme in society that controls the actions of the people and the destiny’s of the wrongdoers. A world without law is a world of chaos and calamity; therefore, laws are established to keep order and safety in the world that God created.

Aristotle once said “At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst. “ Aristotle saw how we as humans were different from other animals; we were able to create these non-existent rules for humans to follow without question. Laws help shape the society we live in, whether they are positive or negative, our morality can come into play when faced with a troubling situation, why should words on paper dictate what we can and cannot achieve? Why is parchment more credible than the humans’ testimony? Should Gods sway the way laws work? These questions are all important when dealing with the creations of rules and regulations.

Bullying is an important topic in society because it continues to be a problem for individuals whether they are in school, at work or even at home. Bullying can be demonstrated verbally and/or physically. In other words, it is when one hurts or threatens to harm a person to do his/her wantings. It is controversial whether Canadian law has adequately addressed this topic. Bullying has indeed been addressed properly throughout Canada’s law system in various ways. The goal of this essay is to show that the justice system has made many laws and regulations to help victims or anyone involved in the bullying through the many bills created to amend existing acts, the created action plans against bullying and laws that are created in the Criminal Code.

He believed that in order to understand law, one must first realize what law’s purpose is. He, like Thomas, argued that law’s purpose it to benefit society by creating a morally sound order to human action and conduct. He detailed seven goods that he believed to be intrinsic and universal, and argued that laws should be enforced under the stipulation that they adhere to the enhancement of these goods, because they are what determines a fulfilling life. They are: life, knowledge, play, aesthetic experience, sociability, practical reasonableness, and religion. The goods that relate to the thesis of this paper the most are knowledge and sociability, as the result of the case has a direct benefit on them and is, therefore, moral and legitimate. Legal positivists, however, disagree that morality has any place in determining what legitimate law is.

The dilemma/ethical issue that arises out of this case is in the hands of Jill Lassiter. She is the newly appointed executive director of a charity dedicated to helping single mothers called Good Works for Women. She must get the financial statements in order so that they satisfy Ms. Lyndelle Oakes, the organization’s largest donor. Jill must decide whether to restate her budget using faulty estimates or to be honest about the organization’s difficulties and face losing a crucial donation.

In the beginning, there were no laws to dictate to man what he could or could not do. Man simply did as he wanted. But as time passed and the strong started taking advantage of the weak, people came to the decision that life would be much safer and better if there were laws to protect them. Therefore, the need for laws and justice came about only for the sole purpose

Rules and laws are necessary in order to maintain a civilized society because absence of law provides an open opportunity to go against the general foundation of the society. It goes against one's own conscience. The fear of punishment is absent which contributes to the growing confidence of the wrongdoer that he or she can get away with anything. This disturbs the balance of our civilized society encouraging more and more people to take on this habit. For example, in Lord of the Flies there are no adults on the island at all, so Jack feels that he can do whatever he wants without the fear of any consequences.

The contrast between Natural Law and Legal Positivism is a necessary starting point for those who wish to understand the relationship between law and morality, and the most varied manners in which it influences society to this day. When it comes to analyzing which theory offers the most well-rounded idea of law, one can argue that Legal Positivism provides the best definition of what law is at its essence. However, because Legal Positivism came to exist as a critique to what was proposed by Natural Law theorists, it is significant that both are explored in depth as means to support such argument.

Law and morality work together to guide our behavior; while law does it by punishing us if we do something wrong, morality does it through incentives. In their articles, both H.L.A Hart in “Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals,” and Lon Fuller’s reply to professor Hart in “Positivism and Fidelity to Law,” discuss the concept of law post world war II Germany and their re-imagining of natural law as put forth by Gustav Radbruch’s theory. In this paper, I hope to show how both law and morality is needed to create just rules, more specifically drawing from the “grudge informer” case mentioned in Hart’s article. First, I will explain the dilemma of the “grudge informer” case and the contradicting theory laid down by Radbrunch’s.

When it comes to large sums of money, it is not uncommon for the spender to feel they have been ripped off or become over protected. The practice of law is no exception to this phenomenon, and crocked lawyers and paralegals have negatively contributed to the notion. On several occasions law professionals have taken client money for personal use, acting against the law and rules of professional conduct. Although lawyers and paralegals have their own individual rules and guidelines to abide by, they follow the same professional structure of proper conduct. The rules of conduct for paralegals is governed by the Law Society of Upper Canada and is the governing body responsible for reports of misconduct. Further investigations will lay out the proper procedures and tasks that must be completed when a paralegal encounters an accusations of misconduct, specifically when a client accuses a paralegal of misappropriating money from the clients trust fund. When it comes to possible options it is important to remember that by proactively sending a report of the circumstance to the Law Society of Upper Canada with a detailed list of events, bookkeeping and accounts billed to the client will help your case prior to the client reporting you to the Law Society. Should a paralegal choose to ignore the threat of the client, in hopes that the client will not follow through with higher involvement, the paralegal will then face an audit by the Law Society. If the Law Society is apprised that the

Law can be defined as the written agreement that a society agrees upon this dictates appropriate and acceptable conduct and behaviour we display toward each other. Law is the foundation of the society it can only work if the society abides by it and work to maintain its existence, this will help solve any problems and crimes.