At Virginia Tech, a professor is being accused of defrauding the university. This case involves over $1 million dollars in grant funding. Yiheng Percival Zhang was charged with wire fraud and making false statements. His lawyer told the Roanoke Times that he remains innocent and will fight the charges brought upon him. Yiheng is a biological systems engineering professor. A postdoctoral researcher and a graduate are also being charged for fraud with the university. All three of these people, but mainly Yiheng withheld grant funds. Zheng filed for grants when the work was previously done in China. The perpetrators are the three individuals who defrauded the university and the university is the
On April 14, 2015, Brian F. Guillot, Esq., of Metairie Louisiana, submitted a complaint to Office of the Bar Counsel regarding Ernest A. Solomon. Guillot asserts that Solomon failed to comply with Guillot’s request for accounting in reference to the estate of Elmore C. Desvigne, Sr. Solomon has allegedly violated Mass.R.Prof.C 1.15(c) and (d).
The Supreme Court case, Atkins v. Virginia, argues the crime committed by Daryl Atkins. Atkins, with the help of William Jones, abducted Eric Nesbitt. Nesbitt is an airman from a nearby Air Force Base. The boys requested he give them his money. When they realized he only had $60, they brought him to an ATM and forced him to take out an additional $200. After receiving the money, they brought Nesbitt to an isolated area and shot him eight times. The ATM had picked up the robbery on camera, so both boys were quickly identified and arrested. They both came up with stories that the other had pulled the trigger, but it was Atkins whose stories didn’t match up the most. It was a little while after that Atkins’ cellmate reported that Atkins confessed to murdering Nesbitt. A deal was given to Jones so that he would only get life imprisonment if he testified against Atkins. Atkins was then later convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death even though the defense had presented school records showing that his low IQ score is evidence that he is mildly mentally retarded.
There is one case that intrigues me, and confusing to me as well, Tompkins v. Alabama State University (AS) (1995). In the case of T v. AS, AS was told by a federal judge that the university needed to spend more state funds for scholarships to attract white students, the university was primarily black. The judge required the university to become more diversified. Jessie Tompkins along with others filed a lawsuit against the university and its white scholarship. In 2000 AS changed the name of the scholarship, making it racially inclusive. Tompkins denied the settlement because AS could still discriminate (Legislatures, June 2016). My confusion is, most want even opportunities for everyone, but AS had to change the program so it could no longer
In the case, Banks v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, the plaintiff is Braxston Lee Banks and the defendant is the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The case can be found in volume 977 of the Federal Reporter, Second Series starting on page number 1081. The court that decided the case was the Seventh Circuit, United States Court of Appeals in 1992.
Ling Nan ZHENG, Ren Zhu Yang, Yun Zhen Huang, Wen Qin Lin, Sai Bing Wang, Ye Biao Yang, Cui Zhen Lin, Rong Yun Zheng, Hui Fang Lin, Xiu Ying Zheng, Jin Ping Lin, Hui Ming Dong, Yu Bing Luo, Sau Chi Kwok, Sai Xian Tang, Yi Zhen Lin, Rui Fang Zhang, Mei Juan Yu, Mei Ying Li, Qin Fang Qiu, Yi Mei Lin, Mei Zhu Dong, Fung Lam, Xiu Zhu Ye, Sing Kei Lam, and Xue Jin Lin, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. LIBERTY APPAREL COMPANY INC., Albert Nigri, and Hagai Laniado, Defendants-Cross-Claimants-Appellees, Ngon Fong Yuen, 88 Fashion Inc., Top Five Sportswear, Inc., S.P.R. Sportswear, Inc. and 91 Fashion, Inc., Defendants, Lai Huen Yam, a/k/a Steven Yam, 998 Fashions, Inc. and 103 Fashion Inc.,
A young woman converses with her mother, with a huge smile on her face. She excitedly shares details about this amazing man that she met and how happy he makes her. Her mother extends the same level of happiness to her daughter, thrilled to hear that she has finally found her true love. Moments later, a tall man walks through the door and the mother’s once joyful visage instantly changes to a more shocked and unpleasant expression. “Mom,” the young girl says, “this is John!” Clearly, the young woman talked fondly of this man, but why did the mother react strangely after getting one good look at him? Maybe it was important to point out that this tall man was also a tall black man, a man
The Commonwealth of Virginia v. Allen (609 S.E.2d 4, Va. 2005) was a fascinating case. The case focused on two expert witness testifying for the state and the other for the defendant, and if they acted and behaved ethically during the proceedings. Successive information will be addressed to prove the thought process behind my opinion given in this case. The APA code of ethics and specialty guidelines will be used to support my reasoning. Furthermore, they will serve as a baseline of boundaries within the profession to determine the expert witness’ influences to the case as well as their behavior within the profession.
Members of the University of Illinois’s men’s swim team filed a lawsuit in 1993 claiming that the school was discriminating against them by cutting their team and not the women’s swim team. The members claimed that this decision was in violation of Title IX, a law that prohibited discrimination on the basis of gender, along with the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The University of Illinois made the decision to cut the men’s swim team due to budgetary limitations. Along with the men’s swim team, the men’s diving, men’s fencing, and women’s diving team were also cut for the same reason. There were many instances previous to this case where female athletes have filed lawsuits claiming that they were being discriminated against, and that the institution was in violation of
Writing in opinion of the court in the case of Fisher V. University of Texas at Austin (II). This case had been previously heard by the Supreme Court resulting in a 7-1 decision that explained the University had no grounds to apply any preference to racial minorities in the application or the acceptance process. The case was reopened at both the fifth circuit court and the Supreme Court. There will be seven justices presiding over this case, with the death of Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Elena Kagan recusing herself.
July 6, 1964: President Lyndon B. Johnson signs The Civil Rights Act, which prohibits racial discrimination and mentions the use of “affirmative action to overcome the effects of prior discrimination.”
Both sides had major arguments and reasons why they thought their side was right. Regents of the University of California said that their special admissions program helped limit discrimination in our society. Medical schools normally were discriminatory towards minors (by the admission process based of credentials) so this program helped ease that problem. The Regents of the University of California also stated that the program will help poor communities by giving them physicians that will want to go and help out the cause of where they grew up. Regents of the
The case of Mercer v. Duke University deals with the issue of women being allowed to play on contact sports teams. This case also raises issues of discrimination and whether or not federally funded institutions are prohibited from discrimination under Title IX. This is a very good case because it deals with a high-profile university and whether or not discrimination was an issue of one of the university’s college athletics.
1. The three aspects of fraud - Perceived pressure, Rationalization, and Opportunity were present in the CIT case as follows:
As requested I have completed an analysis of the accounting fraud case at Computer Associates (CA) in preparation of your speech at the American Accounting Associations annual meeting. I have structured my analysis to correspond to six key questions that arose from the case and Stephen Richards actions while Head of Global Sales at Computer Associates.
Chapter 2 Harvard Press Book (2006). Performance management: Measure and improve the effectiveness of your employees. (Chapter 2) Motivation: The Not-So-Secret Ingredient of High Performance. Harvard Business School Publishing. Cambridge, MA. Lynn, I., Hodge, Y. & Yemen G. (2007). Teamwork turmoil. University of Virginia Darden School Foundation. Beamish, P. & Jiang, R. & (2011). The Chinese fireworks industry. Richard Ivey School of Business Foundation. Kaplan, R.S. (2010). Leading change with strategy execution system. Harvard Business School Publishing. Cambridge, MA. Karkhardt, D. & Hanson, J. (1993). Informal networks: The company behind the charts. Harvard Business School Publishing. Cambridge, MA. Katzenbach, J. & Smith, D. (1993). The discipline of team. Harvard Business Review. President and Fellows of Harvard College. Kerr, S. (1995). On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Academy of Management Executive. 9 (1), 7-14 Download on class site Kramer, R.M. (2003). The harder they fall. Harvard Business School Publishing. Cambridge, MA. Montgomery, C.A. (2005). Newell Company: Corporate Strategy. Harvard Business School Press.