NUR 714 Legal Case Study Analysis Paper Dorrough v. Wilkes (2002) No 2001-CA-00117-SCT Jonathan R. Heshler California University of Pennsylvania NUR 714 Legal Case Study Analysis The purpose of this paper is to analyze and review the case of Dorrough v. Wilkes (2002). This civil case involved a female patient (Gwendolyn Wilkes) presenting to the emergency room at Boliver County Hospital, being misdiagnosed and discharged by Dr. Dorrough, dying the next day at another hospital after emergency surgery and the patients husband and son bringing a wrongful death medical malpractice action suit forth.…
On this date worker visited the home of Mr. Gene Brown, for the purpose of making first victim contact. When worker arrived, Mr. Brown was in bed watching TV. He stated his son is his primary caregiver but he was recently arrested in Adamsville on drug charges. Mr. Brown stated he had been home alone for two days. The home was cluttered but did not present an odor.…
In the case, Brady v. Maryland 373 U.S. 83, Certiorari was granted to a decision of the Court of Appeals of Maryland to consider whether petitioner was denied a federal right when the appeals court restricted its grant of a new murder trial to the question of punishment, leaving the determination of guilt undisturbed. The appeals court granted a retrial after holding that suppression of evidence by the state violated petitioner's rights under the Due Process Clause, U.S. Constitutional Amendment XIV (Law School Case Briefs, 2013). Furthermore, there was a judgement that had granted the petitioner a new murder trial that was solely based on the issue of his punishment. Since the petitioner was convicted of murder and then sentenced to death in his first trail with the Maryland Court, the petitioner was then informed that the Maryland Courts had withheld a statement that indicated that another individual had admitted that exact homicide. What the Supreme Court had concluded from this case was that, because of the suppression of the evidence was in favorable to an accused upon the request that violated the Due Process Clause required the court to a…
The McCulloch v Maryland case, presided over by John Marshall, dealt with the legality of the State of Maryland’s decision to place taxes on bank notes chartered from outside of the area. The issue was brought to the national level after James McCulloch, leader of the Second National Bank of the United States within Baltimore, refused to pay the imposed fee. The Supreme Court ultimately sided in his favor, citing the fact that the state had ratified the Constitution and then, the Necessary and Proper Clause. Likewise, Congress possesses powers that are not specifically defined within the supreme law of the land, therefore it is up to the discretion of the Judicial Branch to decide whether or not the intent is reasonable. In this case, they…
The court case, “District of Columbia vs. Heller” was a lawsuit filed against the District of Columbia for supposedly, infringing upon the rights protected by the second amendment. The suit was filed by Dick Heller, a police officer in Washington, DC. In an attempt to lower the crime rates, DC placed a ban on all handguns. The chief of police was allowed to give licenses to own handguns for a year, but denied most applicants. After heller and several others were denied, they brought the issue up to the local district court, which ruled in favor of the ban.…
Vermont vs. Brillon In July 2001, Michael Brillon was arrested for striking his girlfriend in Bennington County, Vermont. Brillon was appointed a public defender, Richard Ammons. Ammons was eventually fired by Brillon.…
Opinion Ms. Justice Martinez delivers the opinion of the court. Appellant stands convicted of murdering Mr. Thompkins and possession of an illegal firearm. The Supreme Court of New Jersey found the conviction valid based primarily upon the confession unlawfully obtained from the appellant and the evidence brought to the court which was also unlawfully collected at the victim’s home. On December 24, the Ocean County Sherriff’s department was called to a wellness check of Mr. Thompkins.…
Thesis Statement~ Madalyn Murray O'hair's 1963 Supreme Court case victory removing religion from the public school system has had a directly observable effect on the breakdown of necessary teachings of ethics, morals and values at a very impressionable development period, which is leading to increased acts of juvenile delinquency, teen pregnancy, teen suicide, violence and disrespect for authority. The void created from the removal of religious teachings in public schools has exploded into school age tragedy and dysfunction. Introduction ~ Madalyn Murray O'hair's is known as the woman who removed religious teachings from the public school system.…
One of the most intellectual forces of the Marshall Court was its importance on the Supreme Court's power in Marbury v. Madison. Preceding to the Marshall Court, organizers of the Constitution, For example, Alexander Hamilton inquired the Supreme Court part as the lowest part of the major branch of government. The Marshall Court changed this knowledge in Marbury v. Madison. The case's crucial issue was whether the court had the power to support a constitutional check on the case.…
In the Supreme Court case Tinker v. Des Moines, the Tinkers were suing because they believed that their school violated their first amendment right to freedom of speech. This case was decided in 1969 under the Warren Court with a 7-2 decision. Three of the Tinker children and one of their friends wore black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. Just before the children did this, the school made a rule against protesting the Vietnam War. When the children went to school with the black armbands on, they were suspended.…
On March 26, 1968, the city of Chicago had adopted an ordinance that prohibited protesting within 150 feet of a school during school hours with an exception for peaceful labor protest that would go into effect on April 5, 1968. A man by the name of Earl Mosley had been protesting against black discrimination on the sidewalk beside Jones Commercial High School for seven months prior to the enactment of the ordinance. After seeing the announcement in the newspaper, Mosley had contacted the Chicago Police Department to find out how the ordinance would affect him. The police department informed him saying that if the protesting continued they would arrest him. On April 4, 1968, the day before the ordinance would be enacted, Mosely had ceased…
Butler Community College Trial of the Century Noah Stewart U.S. History 2 Mr. Clark 3/27/17 Concerning the late 19th and 20th century, there have been many famous court cases regarding civil rights issues and the precedents they have set in years to come. However, no such case has accomplished both so easily as the trial of Plessy v. Ferguson.…
In "When Freedoms Collide" George writes about Elane Photography, in specific the horrid files of discrimination and law suits thrown at the owners: Elane Huguenin and her husband. It all began when Elane was contacted by a women named Vanessa Willock who asked to hire Elane Photography for her same gender commitment ceremony. Elane simply rejected because of religious reasons. After Willock got a response from Elane stating she does not photograph same sex marriage, her partner decided to also email Elane about a marriage she was having. Her partner did not disclose that it was same sex marriage and therefor Elane agreed to photograph.…
A Kentucky appeals court ruled on Friday that a Christian T-shirt maker did not discriminate in his refusal to print shirts promoting a gay pride event. In the court ruling, Chief Judge Joy Kramer stated that there was no evidence to prove that Blaine Adamson of Hands On Originals, a shirt-printing company, “refused any individual the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations it offered to everyone else because the individual in question had a specific sexual orientation or gender identity.” Kramer said that instead, Adamson was found to have objected to spreading the message of the group, rather than rejecting them based on their sexual orientation. “Nothing in the fairness ordinance…
The case of Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commision was heard by the US Supreme Court December 5, 2017 and will be decided in 2018. The owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Jack Phillips, is a christian man that designs cakes in the store. David Mullins and Charlie Craig are a same sex couple that went to Masterpiece Cakeshop with the intent of buying a wedding cake. David and Charlie asked to order a cake for their wedding, but Phillips told them that he would not make the wedding cake because it denied his religious beliefs. Phillips still offered to serve them, but he refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage.…