...of its origins from the 2009 Law Reform Commission consultation paper which essentially outlined a framework for the drafting of legislation. Furthermore analysing case law and statue from our jurisdiction and abroad, which was applied in the only real substantive case in Ireland to date, O’Neill v Dunnes Stores Ltd To determine the position of the rescuer in Ireland several factors were considered by the LRC such as the moral versus legal question of a duty to intervene, how intervention affects society and with an increasing level of litigation in modern Ireland, how the courts should view subsequent cases for and against Good Samaritans and Voluntary organisations. LRC Consultation Paper The recognition and protection of persons providing voluntary assistance has been addressed by the LRC Consultation Paper on Civil Liability of Good Samaritans and Volunteers, which proposes the introduction of a statute restricting the liability of such persons who intervene as rescuers. The recommendations in the paper essentially aimed to clarify the confusing position of rescuers in Ireland through the implementation of statute. Section 5.01 of the recommendations states “The Commission recommends that there should be no reform of the law to impose a duty on citizens in general” Historically, common law countries have hesitated to a positive duty to intervene, McMahon and Binchy note that common law has been completely opposed to the imposition of affirmative duties, in particular...
Words: 2468 - Pages: 10
...Unit 3 Case Brief Jon E. Johnson Kaplan, University Unit 3 Case Brief Case: Mitchell v.Lovington Good Samaritan Center Inc., 555 P.2d 696 (N.M. 1976) Facts: On 6/4/1974 the Petitioner, Zelma Mitchell, was terminated from her employment at Lovington Good Samaritan Center, INC., for alleged misconduct. On 6/12/1974, Mitchell applied for unemployment compensation and was found ineligible due to her being terminated for misconduct. She was found to be ineligible by an Unemployment Security Commission Deputy. Mrs. Mitchell filed an appeal to the Appeal Tribunal, and the referee of the Tribunal, reversed the decision of the Unemployment Security Commission Deputy, and her benefits were reinstated. On September 13, 1974, the Good Samaritan Center INC., appealed the decision of the Appeal Tribunal, to the entire Commission pursuant to s 59-9-6(E), N.M.S.A. 1953, and the Appeals Tribunal’s decision was overruled, and Mrs. Mitchell was again disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits. Mrs. Mitchell then asked for and received a review of the Commission’s decision, from the District Court of Bernalillo County, pursuant to s 59-9-6(K), N.M.S.A. 1953. On 01/16/1976, the District Court overturned the Commission’s decision, and Mrs. Mitchell was again reinstated to receive her unemployment benefits. On June 4, 1974, the Petitioner, Mrs. Mitchell, was caught by Center’s director filling in her time sheet, prior to commencing her shift. When questioned about why she was doing...
Words: 1475 - Pages: 6
...A True Samaritan Living in the streets without food and shelter can be hard and given those circumstances, many had lost hope for a better future. At the same time, many individuals that do not suffer hunger or living on the streets might go about their daily routine without thinking about the needs of those less fortunate, but that is not always true. This month the Tampa Bay Times printed the story of Tony March, a Good Samaritan that renders aid to those suffering from hunger. March volunteers for Metropolitan Ministries, an organization that provides shelter for homeless and provides food for many others around the country. March dedicates 20 hours a week in the kitchen preparing meals and making sure the area is ready to do it all over again the next day. As the article continues to detail the labor and hard work of those that help the audience can detect a profound analysis. That is to say, that as the title of the article “A...
Words: 463 - Pages: 2
...Legal Analysis and Writing Unit #5 Case Briefs of Rodman v. New Mexico Employment Security Dept. Apodaca v. New Mexico Department of Labor Employment Security Dept. Name of Student Date University Name Rodman v. New Mexico Employment Security Department, 764 P. 2d. 1316 (N.M.1988) FACTS: Billie J Rodman was terminated from her employment with Presbyterian Hospital as a Unit Secretary on February 17, 1987. Ms. Rodman was terminated under hospital personnel policies following a “third corrective action” notice. Ms. Rodman has been placed on notice and given restrictions on her conduct following issues with her personal problems adversely impacting her place of work. These issues included excessive personal phone calls and unauthorized visitors to her workstation. PROCEDURAL HISTORY: New Mexico Employment Security Department denied Ms. Rodman’s request for unemployment benefits based on her misconduct connected with work under §51-1-7(B). Ms. Rodman appealed to The Appeals Tribunal of the Department of Employment Security. The Tribunal found based on evidence that Ms. Rodman had willing disregarded her employees request to improve her conduct at work despite her contentions that she could not stop a third party from their actions. The hearing officer deemed Ms. Rodman’s actions as unreasonable and constituted misconduct. ISSUE: Did Ms. Rodman’s misconduct on February 17, 1987 which lead to her termination rise to the level of misconduct which would warrant denial...
Words: 1020 - Pages: 5
...Rodman v. New Mexico Employment Security Department, 764 P. 2d 1316 (N.M. 1988) Facts: Ms. Billy J. Rodman, appellee had been employed by Presbyterian Hospital as a unit secretary for nearly eight years when, on February 17, 1987, she was terminated under hospital personnel policies following a "third corrective action" notice. Before her termination restrictions had been placed on Rodman's conduct due to personal problems adversely impacting her place of work. Ms. Rodman was reprimanded in June of 1986 for receiving an inordinate number of personal telephone calls and visitors at her work station, which was disruptive to her own work and to her co-workers. The formal reprimand set forth conditions to prevent further corrective action. Ms. Rodman was to have no personal telephone calls during work hours outside of a designated break or dinnertime, in which event they were to occur in an area not visible to patients, physicians, or other department staff. When leaving the department for dinner, Ms. Rodman was to report to her immediate supervisor and was not to leave the hospital. Ms. Rodman was to make every effort to resolve the matters in her personal life that were causing problems at work. According to the testimony of her supervisor, extremely disruptive telephone calls continued. The doctors were beginning to comment on it. The staff was getting more distressed. According to her supervisor, "Again we talked about the visits, and the behavior at the desk. When the...
Words: 3905 - Pages: 16
...Mitchell v Lovington – Case Brief Melanie Brown Introduction to Legal Studies Robert Morse September 12, 2015 Citation: Mitchell v Lovington Good Samaritan Center, 555 N.M. P.2d 696 (1976) Brief Fact Summary. Mitchell (Appellee) was terminated by Lovington Good Samaritan Center (Appellant) for misconduct. Facts. Appellant terminated Appellee on the grounds of misconduct. Appellant alleges that the Appellee was insubordinate to her superior. Appellant further alleges that the Appellee appeared on at least two occasions out of uniform and refused to performed job duties for a day, which included dispensing medication to patients. On a separate occasion, Appellee again refused to perform duties as relief medication aid. Finally, Appellee was noted to be unethical and time consuming in performing job duties. Appellant denied unemployment on grounds of misconduct due to Appellee’s repeated disregard for rules and job responsibilities. Issue. Whether the Appellant had just cause to deny unemployment benefits to Appellee upon termination of employment after one year for repeated misconduct under § 59-9-5(b), N.M.S.A. 1953. Rule. The term “Misconduct” is not defined in the Unemployment Compensation Law [§ 59-9-5(b), N.M.S.A. 1953]. In Boynton Cab Co. v Neubeck, 237 Wis. 249, 259-60, 296 N.W. 636, 640 (1941), the Wisconsin Supreme Court defined misconduct as limited to conduct evincing such wilful wanton disregard of an employer’s interests as...
Words: 705 - Pages: 3
...Three Briefs Helen Mayes Kaplan University PA205: Introduction to Legal Analysis and Writing June 26, 2012 Citation- Mitchell v. Lovington Good Samaritan Center, Inc. 555 P.2d 696 (N.M. 1976) Facts- 1. Plaintiff (Mrs. Mitchell) was terminated from her job at Lovington good Samaritan Center, Inc., due to alleged misconduct. Plaintiff then filed for unemployment compensation benefits. Due to the finding from the deputy of the Unemployment Security Commission Mrs. Mitchell was denied benefits for seven weeks. Plaintiff appealed the decision and was granted her money. The Unemployment center appealed that ruling and the first ruling went back into effect. Mrs. Mitchell appealed that ruling applied for and was granted certiorari from the decision. The Plaintiff’s money was reinstated to her by the District Court. 2. Mrs. Mitchell was terminated from her job on June 4, 1974. On April 2 and April 3, 1974, Plaintiff went to work out of uniform. The first day she was told to go home and change she refused to do so, however, on the second day she did as she was told. Then on May 15, 1974, the plaintiff was singing while working, it was reported as unethical and time- consuming. Another incident happened on May 24, 1974. Mrs. Mitchell was told to change from medications to the floor routine. She was told why she was being switched but she was not co-operative. From that day unit June 4, 1974 Mrs. Mitchell refused to do her job. On June 4, 1974 Mrs. Mitchell went to...
Words: 1976 - Pages: 8
...Unit 8-Assignment Memo Statement of Facts: Natalie Attired a 23 year old female began working as a waitress at Biddy’s’ Tea House and Croissanterie in Truth or Consequences, New Mexico in May of 2009. Thirteen months after starting working for Biddy’s Tea House Mrs. Attired got a full-sleeve tattoo on her upper forearm. The tattoo was only partially covered by the waitress uniform required to be worn by the employee. Biddy Baker, the owner of Biddy’s Tea House told Ms. Attired to have the tattoo removed or be fired. Ms. Attired refused to have the tattoo removed and was terminated the following Friday one week from being warned. Mrs. Attired had be warned by a “seasoned” employee of 10 years of Biddy’s Tea House that if the tattoo was visible she would be terminated. Other than the warning of her coworker there are no written rules or handbooks outlining personal appearance including but not limited to tattoos. Mrs. Attired would like to know if she can sue the New Mexico Employment Security Board for denying her unemployment benefits under N.M. Stat. Ann. Sec. 51-1-7 (West, 2012) after ruling she was terminated from her employment due to misconduct. Biddy Baker, owner of Biddy’s Tea House states her reasoning for terminating Ms. Attired is as follows: The “more mature” clients of the Tea House would be “disgusted and appalled” by the tattoo. Ms. Baker was unable to provide proof to a decline in revenue due to Ms. Attireds appearance. Ms. Baker did provide...
Words: 896 - Pages: 4
...and thinking through issues) * Both deliberate and conscious of challenges of relating Biblical faith to Social issues * Housing and immigration are public policy issues * Daniel devotes a chapter to this question, using “Caesar vs. God” image from New Testament * Micah Shows up in both books (see below) * Differences? * Is immigration more of a “hot button” issue than housing? * If so, do we find different kinds of rhetoric? * Phil comment in class: Does Reckford focus more on system or structures or root causes (next slide) and Daniel more on individuals? * If so, do we have different kinds of solidarity in these two approaches? * Root Causes (“cycle”) of Poverty (structural analysis) (52-53) * Rhetorical device? * Cites 5 of them * “social capital” (56-58) is a rich illustration * Solidarity involves “learning” and “sensitivity” and “collaboration” (60) * Corresponding interventions/Solutions * E.g. “not charity but capital” (Clarence Jordan, cited 54) * 62-63: justice = level playing field (Sen. M. Fenwick, grandmother) * Housing is one of several interventions, but foundational (59) * Note structural components (infrastructure) of this intervention * E.g. ONE Campaign (http://www.one.org/us/) : 1% of US budget against extreme poverty * Immigration as “spiritual pilgrimage” * Religion/Public Square (ch.4) * “Do I believe...
Words: 2923 - Pages: 12
...Mitchell v. Lovington Good Samaritan Center, Inc., 555 P.2d 696 (1976) Procedural History: This case began with the Unemployment Security Commission, was seen at appellate levels, then seen at the District Court level, and now it’s at supreme court of Wisconsin. Attempting to receive the denied seven weeks of unemployment benefits. At District court level it was decided that the unemployment benefits be reinstated. Appellant Center is now appealing this under misconduct under s 59-9-5(b), N.M.S.A.1953. Facts: Mitchell, a full time nurse’s aide and a part-time relief medications nurse for the Center in Lovington, publicly name-called the Director of the Center, Smith, and the Director of Nurses, Stroope. There were previous misconducts such as insubordination, improper attire and previous name-calling incidents. Rule: The Wisconsin Supreme Court found no statutory definition of misconduct in the Unemployment Compensation Law in a prior case and then adopted the following definition for misconduct: is limited to conduct evincing such wilful or wanton disregard of an employer’s interests as is found in deliberate violations or disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect of his employee, or in carelessness or negligence of such degree or recurrence as to manifest equal culpability, wrongful intent or evil design or to show an intentional and substantial disregard of the employer’s interests or of the employee’s duties and obligations...
Words: 388 - Pages: 2
...Mitchell v. Lovington Good Samaritan Ctr., Inc. 555 P.2d 696 (N.M. 1976) Issue: What constitutes misconduct under New Mexico Statutes Annotated; whether Mitchell committed actions which constituted misconduct under N.M. Stat. Ann.§ 59-9-5(b) (West 1953). Holding: Misconduct is not defined by the Unemployment Compensation Law within the New Mexico Statutes Annotated; however, the Wisconsin Supreme Court case Boynton Cab Co. v. Neubeck, 237 Wis. 249, 259-60, 296 N.W. 636, 640 (Wis.1941) formulated a definition which the Supreme Court of New Mexico adopted. This law states misconducted occurs with any of the following: disregards the standard of behavior, to show an intentional and substantial disregard of the employer’s interest, and disregard of the employer’s duties. Such actions as inefficiency, unsatisfactory conduct are not to be deemed as misconduct. (ld.) Analysis: With the definition of misconduct being adopted by the courts Mrs. Mitchell’s acts of name calling (terms such as birdbrain and “white” girl), improper attire (wearing non uniform pants), and insubordination (refusing job assignments and singing after being told to stop) on multiple occasions shows sufficient misconduct. The incidents as a whole show a consistent disregard for the center and Mrs. Mitchell’s co-workers. Decision: Therefore, as a result it is clear that Mrs. Mitchell committed various forms of misconduct over a three month period on her own accord with complete disregard...
Words: 1748 - Pages: 7
...Mitchell v. Lovington Good Samaritan Ctr.,Inc., 555 P.2d 969 (1976) Facts: On June 4, 1974 Zelma Mitchell the petitioner-appellee was fired from Lovington Good Samaritan Center, Inc. the reason being alleged misconduct. Mitchell applied for unemployment compensation benefits on the 12th of June 1974, Ms. Mitchell's actions were considered to be misconduct by a deputy of the unemployment security commission. This then disqualified Ms. Mitchell from seven weeks of benefits pursuant to 59-9-6(E) N.M.S.A 1953. Mitchell's acts were being defiant, not using the proper attire, name calling and other conduct with evidence that it was done on purpose regardless of the employer's interest. Ms. Mitchell filed an appeal on the 24th of July 1974; the referee of the Appeal Tribunal reversed the deputy's decision and reinstated these benefits to Mitchell on the 28th of August 1974. After this appeal, the Center appealed the decision of the Appeal Tribunal on September 13, 1974 to the whole commission pursuant to 59-9-6-(E), N.M.S.A, 1953. The commission then overruled the Appeal Tribunal and reinstated the disqualification of the seven week period. Ms. Mitchell was then granted certiorari from the District Court of Bernalillo County pursuant to 59-9-6(K), N.M.S.A 1953. Last, on the 16th of January 1976, the commission's decision was reversed by the District Court and it was ordered to reinstate Mrs. Mitchell her benefits with judgment of the District Court, the center of Appeals. Issue:...
Words: 2680 - Pages: 11
...communities they represent. In this analysis, I will explore the ethical and moral values of the main characters in the movie in performing their various official capacities. I will also elaborate on health insurance coverage by defining and reviewing the difference and similarities of PPO and HMO. Below is an ethical analysis of the characters in the movie “John Q.”: First of all let me explain what the movie is about before touching on the moral and ethical dilemmas of the characters. The director of this movie Nick Cassavetes reveals a social issue in the health care industry. He explains the ordeals of John Archibald, whose son has a serious cardiac condition that requires urgent surgery. John did not have an appropriate health insurance policy to cover the cost of the operation; the hospital chooses not to take the Good Samaritan route, and refuse to proceed with the operation. Therefore, John Q is confronted with a moral dilemma to accept fate and prepare for his son’s funeral as the Hope Memorial Hospital administrator, Rebecca Payne have suggested, or raise funds for the cardiac operation, which is a daunting task considering the time and emergency nature of the situation his son is in. John decided to take the hospital staff and other patients at the emergency room hostage. In the Geuras, Dean, and Charles Garoralo text for this course have discussed the four sub groups of absolutism which will be discussed in this analysis. It talks about philosophers like...
Words: 2607 - Pages: 11
...Mitchell v. Lovington Good Samaritan Center, Inc., 555 P.2d 696 (1976) Facts: The Appelle was terminated from the Lovington Good Samaritan Center, Inc. On June 4, 1974. On June 12, 1974 Mrs. Mitchell applied for unemployment compensation benefits. She was initially disqualified from seven weeks of benefits by a deputy of the Unemployment Security Commission. Mrs. Mitchell then fill an appeal, the Appeal Tribunal reversed the deputy’s decision. Mrs. Mitchell’s benefits were reinstated on August 28, 1974. On September 13, 1974 the center appealed the decision made by the appeal tribunal to the whole commission. The commission over ruled the Appeal Tribunal and reinstated the seven week disqualification period. Mrs. Mitchell then applied for and was granted certiorari from the decision of the commission to the District Court of Bernalillo County. The District Court reversed the commission’s decision and ordered the benefits to be reinstated. Issue: The issue is whether Mrs. Mitchell’s actions constituted misconduct under § 59-9-5(b), N.M.S.A. 1953 Rule: The term “misconduct” is not defined in the Unemployment Compensation Law. The Wisconsin Supreme Court found that in a prior case no statutory definition of misconduct existed, and they formulate a definition for such. The Supreme Court of New Mexico adopts that definition and hold Mrs. Mitchell’s acts constituted misconduct. Applying: Mrs. Mitchell’s insubordination, improper attire, name calling, and other conducted evidence...
Words: 1199 - Pages: 5
...and requirements. Carrying a concealed handgun in public is permitted in all 50 states as of 2013, when Illinois became the last state to enact concealed carry legislation. States that implemented "shall-issue" concealed carry laws reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7%, and robbery by 3%, according to a 2000 analysis of FBI crime data by economist and political commentator John R. Lott Jr., PhD. Lott calculated that 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults, and 12,000 robberies could have been prevented between 1977 and 1992 if concealed carry had been legal in every US state during that time period. Violent criminals will always have guns. Rather than being victims, concealed handgun carriers have a sense of safety and security, especially when going outside at night or in dangerous areas. After the Apr. 20, 1999 Columbine High School massacre, the state of Colorado enacted the 2003 Concealed Carry Act to allow law-abiding citizens the right to carry a concealed weapon. Citizens can stop crimes if they have a concealed carry’s permit for example say some one is robbing a store at gun point a good Samaritan can stop him because he has a gun. The average police response time to an emergency call is 11 minutes, with some responses taking much...
Words: 492 - Pages: 2
