Legal release

Introduction The Corporate personhood, a universal legal model, grants corporations genuine rights and responsibilities similar to those of individual citizens. This concept proved useful in American jurisprudence in that it simplified one’s interactions with huge conglomerates. Citing the Fourteenth Amendment of the constitution, the term corporate personhood served to consider corporations similar to individuals. In that vane, corporate entities like individuals could join contracts as a single

Petitioner, Kannan S., b/n/f Vijayalakshmi and Kandasami S., by and through the attorney of record, Dorene J. Philpot; Philpot Law Office, P.C.; 7314 Offats Pointe; Galveston, Texas 77551-1228. Respondent, Beaumont Independent School District (“BISD” or the “District”), serves its Objections and Responses Petitioner’s (sic) First Request For Production of Documents. Pursuant to Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 192 and 196, BISD responds to Petitioner’s First Request for Production of Documents

I didn’t know what a divorce was. I wish I never had to find out either. In the dictionary, the definition of a divorce is the legal dissolution of a marriage by a court or other competent body. But for me, a divorce is much more than a legal dissolution; it is my whole world being torn apart and thrown on the ground in pieces. When my parents got divorced I was only eight. It was really hard to take in because my sister was only five and she didn’t understand it like I did. All she knew was

I. Introduction On August 6th, 2014, Eleanor Mingle, the mother of EE’s client, Hummel, died in an accident when one of the elevators EE had a maintenance contract on malfunctioned. Hummel saw Mingle get into the elevator, saw the elevator stop at the 9th floor, heard the elevator falling and somebody screaming, felt the building shake, and smelled oil burning. She did not know if Mingle was in the elevator at the time nor did she directly witness the injury occurring. Hummel sued our client in

Case Title and Citation-- Springer v. Fairfax County No. 97-1482 Opposing Parties--Edward P. SPRINGER, a minor, by his parents and next friends, Edward and JoAnne Springer;  Edward Springer;  Joanne Springer, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. THE FAIRFAX COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, Defendant-Appellee, Robert Spillane, officially as Superintendent, Fairfax County Public Schools, Defendant. Critical Facts-- During most of his years in the Fairfax County school system, Edward Springer demonstrated no need for special

Michael Lewis CCET 3740 Construction Management 11/3/16 Lin vs Hutch Realty Partners LLC I. Abstract From a fall, 62 million was awarded to the construction worker, which is the largest single plaintiff ever awarded to in Queens. Something as simple as a tie-off wasn’t provided for the worker in thus resulted to permeant brain damage and a large lawsuit. II. Introduction Falls are the leading cause of death in the construction industry, and in this case Lin and Hutch Realty Partners LLC, and Gamut

Question 1: An ambitious but relatable attorney (played by Matthew McCaughey) wakes up on a cool, fall morning. Just as he is opening his eyes, he notices his phone is blowing up with notifications. He’s been double-booked with two court appearances at two different courts! If that weren’t bad enough, he also needs a signature from one of these clients (who lives 30 miles away), and he’s scheduled to meet with the other that morning! What will he do? If the client living 30 miles away must also

1. Case name: “Geringer v. Wildhorn Ranch, Civ. A. No. 87-F-1213 (1988) 2. Procedural History: A wrongful death lawsuit was filed by Diane Geringer due to the drowning deaths of both William and Jared Geringer. The trial courts found that the defendants (Mr. Waters and Les Bretzke), were negligent in their duties while the family were vacationing at the Wildhorn Ranch. 3. Facts: Based on the facts presented, the family was vacationing at the Wildhorn Ranch during August of 1986. William and Jared

Actus Reus Non Facit Reum Nisi Mens Sit Rea: An act does not make a person guilty unless the mind is also guilty. In the case of R. v. Pickton (2010), the Supreme Court of Canada convicts serial killer Robert Pickton of second degree murder and demonstrates that even if an individual was not the sole perpetrator of a crime, they are still held equally liable for the crime as long as they are an active participant or otherwise abetted the misconduct. The Supreme Courts made the correct decision in

DEFENDANT’S’ BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF its MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT Defendants, Starboard Financial Services (“Starboard” or “Defendant”), by and through counsel, respectfully submit their brief in support of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Jocelyn Harkin (“Harkin” or “Plaintiff”) alleges that Starboard are culpable to her for violations of Title VII by discriminating against her based-on sex, [dkt. 1 at ¶223], and for retaliation for her