our honor, the prosecution respectfully requests that the defense motion be denied and the statement made by the defendant Cameron Awbrey be admitted into court. In today’s case, the officer’s actions did not violate the defendant's 4 and 5 amendment rights. The statement should be admitted into court for three reasons: The connection between the illegal stop and the statement were attenuated by an intervening circumstance, Officer West was acting in good faith, and Cameron Awbrey voluntarily made the statement at his own free will. This statement should be admissible due to the attenuation of the illegal stop and the defendant’s statement.…
Argument 1. The judgement for Appellee should be affirmed because the Appellant’s mother had apparent authority to consent to the search of the shoebox. Appellant’s mother, Ms. Fallsbauer, demonstrated apparent authority to consent to the search of the shoebox when she stated her prior ownership of the shoebox. (R. at 5.)…
This evidence once excluded can no longer be used. It is equivalent to it no longer existing in the eyes of the jurors, since it cannot weigh in the results of this trial. Even though the evidence suggests his guilt, our client has the right to be protected as a citizen to shield themselves and their properties from warrantless searches. There was no warrant obtain for the search that took place. No consent was given and there was expectation of privacy in his home.…
Wiencek further argues that the trial court erred by considering “parol evidence to vary the effective date of the [B108 agreement] and to controvert the integration clause.” CHH, for its part, avers that the admission of parol evidence was proper because it was offered to determine whether the contract was effective. We hold that the circuit court did not violate the parole evidence rule because extrinsic evidence was not offered to add or modify any terms to the B108 agreement. Generally, parol or extrinsic evidence is inadmissible to vary the terms of an integrated contract.…
The court held that the district court erred when it relied on whether a manager's con- duct seriously affected plaintiff worker's psychological well being or led her to suffer injury. The court held that while Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.S. ß 2000e-2(a)(1) barred conduct that would seriously affect a reasonable person's psychological well being, the statute was not limited to such conduct. The court held that as long as the environment would reasonably be perceived and was perceived as hostile or abusive, there was no need for it also to be psychologi- cally injurious. The court found that psychological harm could be taken into account, but was not required by the statute. In Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc., the Court…
Can an argument be made that alternative dispute resolution diminishes our constitutional rights to a fair trial? Compare and contrast the fairness between a civil trial court decision and a decision reached by a single mediator in a binding mediation. The fairness of a civil trial decision and a mediation decision has many differences, such as who makes the decision and whether or not there is a right of appeal. The fairness of a civil trial decision includes a judge, jury, a winner and a loser.…
THE DISTRICT COURT ERRED IN GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT BECAUSE THE GOODS PROVIDED BY BOTH PARTIES ARE DIRECTLY RELATED AND BOTH PARTIES CONSUMERS ARE DIRECTLY RELATED. The related goods Frisch factor should favor Lamborghini because Lamborghini and AEV’s goods and consumers are related. Lamborghini’s goods are related because both goods are high performance vehicles whose prices overlap and it is possible that one company could be associated or sponsored with the other.…
II. Standard for Summary Judgment Rule 56 of the Federal rules of Civil Procedure governs the standard for summary judgment. The rule states, “The court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows 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.…
1. Goods versus Services. A. ISSUE: Discuss fully whether the contract between the Palermos and Colorado Carpet was primarily for the sale of goods or the sale of serv¬ices. The contract between the Palermos and Colorado Carpet was primarily for the sale of services because the Palermos orally agreed to the purchase and installation of the carpet.…
Argument for Tangible Detriment: The District court improperly granted summary judgment as a reasonable jury could find that Prufrock suffered a tangible detriment when he was denied tutoring and received the worst English grade of his college career after he rejected Crewel 's offer to "take care of things" for him if he was "a good boy".(DEP.) To determine whether plaintiff suffered a tangible detriment, courts consider whether 1) plaintiff suffered a material loss and 2) the loss resulted from plaintiff 's rejection of advances. (Johnson) Courts have defined a material loss as an adverse change to a crucial aspect of the employment or educational experience. See e.g., Bowman v. Shawnee, 220 F.3d 456, 461-462 (6th Cir. 2000);…
The Courts held that an expansion of the right to counsel would intrude upon a portion of the prosecutor's preparation interviews with witnesses, and was vehemently opposed to such a result, which concluded that the adversary process was sufficient to expose any possible defects in photographic identification procedures. (Salisbury,…
The following directions were made: 66. The parties to exchange any additional evidence on which they seek to rely by 20th January 2015, this is to include any witness statements from any witness, including the defendant himself; and:- 67. The parties are prohibited from relying on any evidence not already served or served in accordance with paragraph 1 of these directions, without the permission of the…
Then the Magistrate would decide based on the victim's testimony in addition to any circumstantial…
RUVINI KAPURUBANDARA, ID 18540895 (word count 1257 only the answer ) ANSWER QUESTION 1 : Facts Arabella Lim is an architect Had provided designs drawings and specification that desings was approved by the wonder council for the balcony on the first floor of the wonder wood town hall trivia night was held on the first floor magistrate snape heavily intoxicate was leaning against the balcony balcony began to give way magistrate snape fekk to the ground were broken his legs, suffered injuries to his spine Issue : Did Lim breach the duty of care he owed to magistrate snape ? Rules : that the plaintiff had a reasonable foreseeability to owe for the defendant ; Chapman v Hearse that the proximity of relationship to the defendant by…
Case A: Adidas America Inc. vs. Sketchers USA Inc. Background On September 14th, 2015, Plaintiff A (Plaintiff Adidas America Inc.) filed a complaint of trademark infringement, trade dress infringement, unfair competition, deceptive trade practices and trademark and trade dress dilution, against Defendant S (Sketchers USA Inc.). Plaintiff A put forward such claims due to the assertion of belief that throughout the years, Defendant S had knowingly and continuously produced shoes designs which possessed jarringly similar to those of trademarked signature designs produced by Plaintiff A. Plaintiff A and Defendant S are known to have a long ongoing vendetta that stems from the infamous 1994 Civil Suit and 1995 Settlement Agreement. The 1994 Civil Suit was filed for the infringement of Defendant’s Karl Kani footwear design which was the first to infringe Plaintiff A’s…