Family court

Assignment Two: State Court Survey In Arizona, the majority of cities and towns have a municipal court which is sometimes also called city or magistrate court. This court hears misdemeanor and petty offense violations within their town or city. City or town magistrates preside over some criminal and civil traffic cases. Criminal traffic cases with no serious injuries and civil traffic cases that involve violations of city ordinances. They have the ability to issue Orders of Protection and…

on Monday, March 9h and the other on Wednesday, March 11th of 2015. The courtrooms that I visited are both parts of the Fayette County Court, located close to my home. On Monday the 9th the courtroom I visited was a Superior Court room with Judge Fletcher Sams and on Wednesday the 11th I visited a State Court with Judge Jason Thompson. Observing Superior Court was very interesting. I observed a child molestation case, which plead to a lesser offense. While the case we were supposed to observe…

and functioning of courts of law competent disputes affecting private citizens” (Cadiet & Amrani-Mekki, 2008, p. 307). France’s legal system was mainly obtained from Roman law and is based on codified laws that were drafted in 1804 under Napoleon. The French legal system follows…

In general the adversarial court system facilitate various methods of achieving just and fair outcomes in the Criminal Justice system. However, the court system is not the only route in sentencing offenders with less serious charges. Crime is defined as an action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law. On the other side of this is justice; the quality of being fair and reasonable. In this essay, I will be examining to how the court system fails to deliverer justice in…

main issue beyond addressing secondary issues such as right to amend a complaint etc.) at issue in the cases of Tenuto v. Lederle (1997) , Safer v. Estate of Pack (1996) , and Molloy v. Meier (2006) is at which length do physicians have to notifying family (hereditary offspring), close associates, or those in contact with a patient of disease transmission; either through genetic heredity or by contact with a communicable pathogen. In all three cases, the policy is consistent as the three…

reported to his superiors that Sharma’s family had colluded with some police officials and destroyed evidence. This complaint was strangely ignored. The trial court had acquitted Sharma for lack of evidence . Sharma’s acquittal led to a huge public outrage and there was nationwide “Justice for Jessica” campaign. Meanwhile the Delhi High Court reversed the verdict of the trial Court and held Manu Sharma as guilty. He appealed against the verdict and the Supreme Court held that the prosecution has…

In the United States of America there are two types of courts, federal and state. Federal courts are created under the Constitution to determine debates involving the Constitution and laws passed by Congress. State courts are created by a state which includes local courts created by cities, counties, and other municipalities. The differences between federal and state courts are defined mainly by jurisdiction. Federal court jurisdiction hear lawsuits against the United States and those…

money. Anthony, a mentally disabled child that functioned at the level of a five year old, had to spend four weeks in a county jail when his family couldn’t post the five hundred dollar bail. The prosecutor, Barry E Krischer dropped the charges after the issue gained national attention (Hansen 45). In contrast, in 2008 a 22 year old was brought to court as an adult for crimes committed as a juvenile. These included the murder of a seventeen year old student and a 43 year…

IMMIGRATION JUDGE DID NOT ERROR IN GRANTING THE RESPONDENT’S APPLICATION FOR ASYLUM. The Honorable Immigration Judge did not error as a matter of law in concluding that the respondent was a member of the particular social group- a group of family members who resisted narco-trafficker’s demands. When making a credibility finding, an IJ considers the totality of the circumstances, and all relevant factors, and may base the determinations on: the demeanor, candor, or responsiveness of…

religious beliefs, family, friends and even the teachings of philosophers or ethics courses. Judiciary ethics are important to understand because judges make determinations on cases in the legal system as well as interpret laws through judicial review. Judges also have the ability to take the rights of a person away. Ethics govern their behavior and to some extent their decisions. To truly understand…