Yandrich V. Radic Summary

For summary judgment to be granted, the movant must show “that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). The appellate standard of review for reviewing summary judgment orders in this case is the de novo standard, as this is a decision regarding “mixed questions of law and fact”. Barr v. Lafon, 538 F.3d 554, 562 (6th Cir. 2008).

As you are aware, the decision by the Court of the Barton v. Rona case (2012 ONSC 3809) recognized that although Mr. Barton’s misconduct was serious, his specific acts of misconduct were not severe enough to warrant his dismissal. The Court felt that in this situation, a stern warning to him never again to permit a safety violation by an employee would have been sufficient (p.13, para. 55). This was particularly the case, based on your investigation you have performed on April 24, 2009, given that nothing in his excellent work record and no prior infractions suggested that he would not be amenable to such discipline (p.10, para. 40) or that he would repeat such misconduct in the future (p.9, para. 38). Given that the Court could not find that his misconduct met the threshold of striking at the heart of the employment relationship (p.14, para. 55), it concluded that Rona had breached Mr. Barton’s employment contract, and Mr. Barton was entitled to damages as a result (p.14, para. 56).

To state a claim for NIED, a plaintiff must show that: (1) he was located near the scene of the accident; (2) he sensorily and contemporaneously observed the accident; and (3) he and the victim are closely related. Sinn v. Burd, 404 A.2d 672, at 685 (Pa. 1979). There can be little dispute that Arnett was near the scene of the accident. However, whether Arnett sensorily and contemporaneously observed the incident and whether Nolan and Arnett are closely related are in question. This memorandum will address all three

Similarly, the Supreme Court case Romano v. Harrington contested the right to free speech in a public school setting. It involved high school English teacher Michael Romano, who was the faculty advisor of the school’s extracurricular student-published newspaper Crow’s Nest. A student, not part of the newspaper’s student staff, came to him to publish an article in protest of the proposed Martin Luther King Jr. The article was very provocative, so Romano helped him to soften it, but he did not attempt to censor it. Almost directly following this, due to his insensitivity to the racial tension present in their school, Romano was removed from his position as faculty advisor. He did retain his teaching job, though. Romano argued that the principal

Statement of Assignment: You have asked me to prepare a legal memorandum on the question of whether our client can gain relief from intentional infliction of emotional distress occurring from witnessing a friend¡¦s child being injured by a vehicle that is out of control due to being driven at a high rate of speed through a school zone. Pursuant to your request, this memo includes an analysis of the relevant state and federal law.

The Plaintiff, Keller, sued the defendant, DeLong. DeLong was driving Kellers car at Tyngsboro, Massachusetts at approximately 11:40p.m. on April 14, 1963, DeLong collided with a utility pole at the side of the highway. The Trial Court ruled that the sole cause of the accident was the fact that the defendant dozed off to sleep and did not awaken in time to avoid collision with the pole. The driver showed no sign he was going to fall asleep. Defendant, Carl DeLong, suddenly and unexpectedly dozed at the time of the occurrence of the accident. Defendant, DeLong, was not found negligent. Vacated; reversed, affirming trial court’s judgment.

Today I was able to have a quick interview with the honorable Mrs.Salvarez. I asked her a few questions about what she does in the government and if she could clarify some things.

Issue: Whether Mr. Schuester’s behavior in fatally shooting a dog he thought to be a coyote, sufficient to hold him liable for intentional infliction of emotional distress?

The following case analysis seeks to examine the Supreme Court’s decisions in Racine v. Woods, [1983] 2 S.C.R. 173, in regard to the legal questions, basis of reasoning, as well as the cultural implications.

Successful ELL programs in schools require specific knowledge of ever-changing federal and state laws including funding requirements, as well as current knowledge of “best practices” regarding ELL programming. These subjects will be discussed as well as resources for reviewing programming policies against current laws, regulations, and policies.

MILLERSBURG — A Big Prairie man on Monday was sentenced to local jail time for selling marijuana to a confidential informant working with the Holmes County Sheriff's Office in June.

We were able to locate and review the lawsuit Robert Coleman v CDCR, et al. In the complaint the plaintiff alleges that he was moved from a bunk bed cell to a side by side cell, which he claims seriously affected his mental health disorder (schizophrenia). The inmate states that when he informed the C/O that he could not stay in the side by side cell the C/O retaliated against him by placing the inmate in a small cage that he had to stand in for approximately seven hours. According to the inmate, his medical disability prohibits him from standing for long periods of time and subsequently experienced right knee pain and swelling. The inmate also indicates that his placement in a modified program violated his rights against lack of yard time

The court case of the United States v. Morrison seemed to be an unfair case in favor of the men convicted of rape. The United States v. Morrison case was a United States Supreme Court decision, which held that parts of the VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) were unconstitutional because they exceeded congressional power under the Commerce Clause and the Fourteenth Amendment. The USC passed the VAWA that contained a provision (42 USC) that protected victims of gender-based violence, even if no charges had been filed against the criminal. In 1994 at Virginia tech, Christy Brzonkala claimed she was raped by two of her fellow classmates, Antonio Morrison, and James Crawford. During the first hearing of the case, Morrison admitted to having sexual

This case study revolves around the United States of America v. Robert Durandis, Donald Charles, Gilbert Pierre-Charles, Manual Reyes-Gonzalez case, which entails the crime of conspiracy to commit credit card fraud via the use of access devices. An access device is defined as “any card, plate, code, account number… or other means of account access that can be used, alone or in conjunction with another access device, to obtain money, goods, services, or any other thing of value, or that can be used to initiate a transfer of funds” (LII, n.d.). The series of events occurred from November 23rd, 2013 till July 24, 2014; the defendants conspired and devised a plan to commit fraud using counterfeit access devices to obtain a value earning of more than one thousand dollars (United States of America v. Robert Durandis, et al, 2014). The manners and means of the defendants to

5. No. The Supreme Court does not have original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus.