...completion of account’. After that, they consulted their solicitors and sued for the balance. [edit] Judgment Lord Denning MR held that the doctrine of part payment of a debt not discharging the whole ‘has come under heavy fire’ but noted that estoppel, deriving from the principle laid down in Hughes v Metropolitan Railway Co. could give relief in equity. Although in his opinion part payment of debt could satisfy a whole debt, he found that Mrs Rees had effectively held the builders to ransom. Therefore any variation of the original agreement was voidable at the instance of the debtors for duress. “ In point of law payment of a lesser sum, whether by cash or by cheque, is no discharge of a greater sum. This doctrine of the common law came under heavy fire. It was ridiculed by Sir George Jessel in Couldery v Bartram.[1] It was said to be mistaken by Lord Blackburn in Foakes v Beer.[2] It was condemned by the Law Revision Committee (1945 Cmd 5449), paras. 20 and 21 . But a remedy has been found. The harshness of the common law has been relieved. Equity has stretched out a merciful hand to help the debtor. The courts have invoked the broad principle stated by Lord Cairns in Hughes v Metropolitan Railway Co.[3] "It is the first principle upon which all courts of equity proceed, that if parties, who have entered into definite and distinct terms involving certain legal results, afterwards by their own act or with their own consent enter upon a course of negotiation which...
Words: 1885 - Pages: 8
...Case Study on Negligence - Stella v Christine Stella can take an action of Negligence against Christine for her careless conduct regarding the slippery floor as well as the heating urn and steamer. She will be the plaintiff, and Christine, the defendant. Stella bears the burden of proof that Christine owed her a duty of care, but omitted to perform it, which caused her personal injuries and economic loss. The elements, including duty of care, breach of duty of care, and damage, must be proven on the balance of probabilities. If proven, Stella will probably be able to claim monetary compensation for her medical costs, loss of earnings, and suffering and pain. At the meanwhile, however, Christine can defend herself by alleging Stella’s Contributory Negligence so that the amount of her compensation might be reduced. DUTY OF CARE The law states that the duty of care is established upon the reasonable foreseeability test, which means a defendant will owe a duty of care to a plaintiff where it is reasonably foreseeable that their act or omission of act might harm the plaintiff. Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] created the modern concept of negligence. Since then, the test of 'reasonable foreseeability' has been discussed in many cases. Take Wyong Shire Council v Shirt [1980] as an example, in that case the court held that it was a foreseeable risk that the ambiguity of the deep water sign might induce people to believe that the water was deep and therefore safe for water skiing;...
Words: 2159 - Pages: 9
...Contract Law (Mutuality of Consideration) November 7, 20013 SUMMARY OF FACTS Bernie is selling his 2006 Ford Fusion. Vivian makes an offer to buy Bernie’s car for $12,000. Bernie and Vivian meet and agree on the selling price of $12,500. Vivian needs more time to come up the money for the car. Bernie agrees to give Vivian time to come up with the money to purchase his car. Bernie requires Vivian to put down a $1,000 deposit and pay the full balance by March 31st. Bernie drafts up an agreement; and in the agreement and it is stated that if the buyer breaches the agreement, the seller may keep the buyer’s deposit, but the shall be limited to this remedy and only this remedy. Likewise, is the seller breaches the agreement, the seller must refund the purchaser’s deposit, but the parties shall be limited to this remedy and only this remedy. Vivian reads and signs the agreement. Later Vivian realizes that she is not going to be able to get the money together by the deadline. She call’s Bernie to tell him that she is pulling out the deal. Bernie says he is going to keep the deposit. Vivian sues for her deposit claiming there was no mutuality of consideration for the agreement and the contract was therefore void. ISSUE Under Virginia law is their mutuality of consideration when the seller could back out of the agreement by giving the purchaser her deposit back. Rule |Sayres v. Wheatland Group |L.L.C. | OVERVIEW: Defendants sought to apply...
Words: 2144 - Pages: 9
... Guidelines For Writing the Report of Internship Activities 2 Table of Contents What You Should Know Before You Start Your Paper…………………………………………… (including what is done with your paper, how to submit your final paper AND who needs to read your paper before it is finalized) Sample Title Page………………………………………………………………………………….. Sample Internship Paper Release Form……………………………………………………………. Sample Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………. Summary of Internship Experiences………………………………………………………………. Case Summaries…………………………………………………….…………………………....... Self-Evaluation…………………………………………………………………………………...... Evaluation of the M.S. in Counseling Psychology Program………………………………………. Individual Case Summary Format…………………………………………………………………. Family Case Summary Format…………………………………………………………………….. Group Case Summary Format………………………………………………….………………….. Group Case Summary (Process)………………….………………………………………... Group Case Summary (Psycho-educational)……………………….………………............ Group Case Summary (Support/Self-Help Group)………………………………………… Couples Case Summary Format……………………………………………………........................ 3 4 5 6 7 7 8 8 9 12 13 13 14 15 16 Guidelines For Writing the Report of Internship Activities 3 WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW BEFORE YOU START YOUR PAPER Over the years the Guidelines for Writing the Report of Internship Activities has changed, thus you need to be careful to follow the format in THIS CURRENT GUIDELINE instead of relying on the format of previous students’ final papers...
Words: 4473 - Pages: 18
...1. Brown v. Board of Education a. Provide the Constitutional question: Does the segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race deprive the minority children of the equal protection of the laws guaranteed by the 14th Amendment? b. Provide background information: Black children were unable to attend the same schools that white children attend because of segregation laws. One person in particular, Linda Brown, was denied admittance to an all white school, and Thurgood Marshall decided to challenge the protection guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. c. Provide a summary of the opinion of the Court in this case: The Court ruled that all people deserve equal protection. Although black and white areas were built equally, segregation...
Words: 2008 - Pages: 9
...low as to hate him.” —Martin Luther King, Jr. (Nguyen). Many African Americans had many troubles when trying to fight for their rights. Therefore three court cases have changed many perspectives on how black people should be treated. “We may have all come on different ships, but we’re in the same boat now.” —Martin Luther King, Jr. (Nguyen). These cases influenced many changes in the civil rights movements for African American people. Plessy v. Ferguson case was about how the Court upheld a Louisiana law requiring restaurants, hotels, hospitals, and other public places to serve African Americans in separate, but ostensibly equal, accommodations. Thus, African American people staged boycotts with other white people who believed in and like black people. Although this helped many black people get the same equal rights as white people when being served at a public place. This also changed the way black people were looked at in the same way as white people. In summary the case judgement Plessy v. Ferguson helped colored people with getting the same rights as white people in public places (Plessy v. Ferguson). Brown v. Broad of Education case was about the unfair ways of how the different races were harassed in school. This happened because African American children were given poor learning environments and the...
Words: 521 - Pages: 3
...DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISCTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ESTATE OF ROLAND ROHM, by its Personal Representative, Geraldine Livermore, Plaintiff, vs. Case No. 1:04-CV-552 Hon. Richard Alan Enslen DANIEL LUBELAN, individually, JOHN JULIN, individually, JERRY ELLSWORTH, individually, STEVE HOMRICH, individually, DAVID BOWER, individually, jointly and severally, Defendants. _______________________________________/ Of Counsel: HILL AND ASSOCIATES, LLP DeClercq Druminski & Perlman James D. Hill (P88332) Anthony J. DeClercq Attorney for Defendant Attorney for Plaintiff 161 N. Clark St. 55171 Pacific Ridge Drive Chicago, IL 60601 Macomb, MI 48042 (913) 706-9986 (586) 321-7630 JamesDonaldHill@gmail.com decler16@msu.edu January 12, 2002 DEFENDANTS’ BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Authorities........................................................................................................ii Issues Presented...............................................................................................................1 Statement of Facts...........................................................................................................1 Summary of the Argument..............................................................................................3 Standard of Review...............................................
Words: 3221 - Pages: 13
...the gestational parents, who did not intend to create the child, and where failure to allow the child to know his genetic parents would be detrimental to his well-being and none of the parties involved dispute the facts presented? STATEMENT OF FACTS The Petitioners request that the court grant their motion for summary judgment. They seek parental rights of their 12-month old genetic child referred to hereafter as Baby E. Mr. and Mrs. Austero tried unsuccessfully for 5 years to have a baby. Transcr. Depo. Lucila Austero 6:15-16, (Dec. 14, 2013). In August of 2008 they tried In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) despite the expense because they desired to create and raise a biological. Id at 6; Transcr. Depo. Julio Austero...
Words: 1660 - Pages: 7
...Facts This case is unique in that it is a class suit brought by 44children, through their parents, claiming that they bringthe case in the name of “their generation as well asthose generations yet unborn.” Aiming to stopdeforestation, it was filed against the Secretary of theDepartment of Environment and Natural Resources, seeking to have him cancel all the timber licenseagreements (TLAs) in the country and to cease anddesist from accepting and approving more timber licenseagreements. The children invoked their right to abalanced and healthful ecology and to protection by theState in its capacity as parens patriae . The petitionersclaimed that the DENR Secretary's refusal to cancel theTLAs and to stop issuing them was "contrary to thehighest law of humankind-- the natural law-- andviolative of plaintiffs' right to self-preservation andperpetuation." The case was dismissed in the lower court, invoking the law on non-impairment of contracts,so it was brought to theSupreme Courton certiorari. Issue Did the children have the legal standing to file the case? Ruling Yes. The Supreme Court in granting the petition ruledthat the children had the legal standing to file the casebased on the concept of “intergenerationalresponsibility”. Their right to a healthy environmentcarried with it an obligation to preserve that environmentfor the succeeding generations. In this, the Courtrecognized legal standing to sue on behalf of futuregenerations. Also, the Court said, the law on non-impairment...
Words: 1231 - Pages: 5
...Hatfield v. McDaniel et al Doc. 58 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION JERRY BENNETT HATFIELD, III, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) JOHN MCDANIEL, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) CASE NO. 2:11-CV-590-WKW [WO] MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER This case involves the allegedly illegal search and seizure of Plaintiff Jerry Bennett Hatfield’s store and computer. The matter comes before the court on the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Defendants John McDaniel, Gary Graves, Robert Furlong, and the City of Prattville, Alabama. (Doc. # 25.) The parties have argued their positions extensively: Mr. Hatfield filed a Response (Doc. # 29), to which Defendants responded (Doc. # 35), to which Mr. Hatfield filed a sur-reply, to which Defendants responded (Doc. # 45). For the reasons discussed below, summary judgment is due only on Mr. Hatfield’s Fourteenth Amendment and negligence claims. As to Mr. Hatfield’s Fourth Amendment claims, summary judgment is improper. Dockets.Justia.com I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE Subject matter jurisdiction over this action is exercised pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343. The parties do not contest personal jurisdiction or venue, and there are allegations sufficient to support both. II. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiff Jerry Bennet Hatfield, III, runs a car stereo store in Prattville called Powerhouse Audio. Sometimes Mr. Hatfield accepts trade-ins, which are not always the...
Words: 4232 - Pages: 17
...Courtroom Observation Case White v. Gibbs John Simpson Louisiana Tech Abstract This paper observes the court case of White v. Gibbs in which Debbie White is suing Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern under the civil provisions of Indiana’s Dram Shop Act (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2014). Deborah White brought this court case to the Supreme Court in order to argue against the summary judgment filed by the defendants. A summary judgment would allow for them to avoid going to trial only if the Judge sees fit to deem that there are no disputes to the material facts of this case (West Encyclopedia of American Law, 2008). The attorneys representing Mrs. White are Amanda Babbitt and Jackson Walsh. The attorneys for the defendants are Benjamin Walton and Jordan Van Meter. Courtroom Observation Case White v. Gibbs The lawsuit arose from an incident where Mrs. White and her husband Bruno were having dinner at O’Malley’s Tavern. On that night there was another patron at the bar, Edward Hard, who was also Mrs. White’s ex-fiancé. During the court case we find out that Mr. Hard had shown a lot of animosity toward the White’s due to Mr. Hard and Mrs. White’s previous relationship. There was also a former altercation between Mr. White and Mr. Hard, and even though this had been resolved, Mr. Hard still showed this animosity. On this night, Mr. Hard had a bill from O’Malley’s Tavern in which he was charged for purchasing 13 alcoholic drinks. According to the...
Words: 1400 - Pages: 6
...Rasmussen Medical Center Policy: Health Record Documentation Requirements Approval Date: xx/xx/xxxx Policy Group: Medical Staff Bylaws ------------------------------------------------- All medical staff and health care providers shall: History & Physical 1. A complete history and physical examination shall, in all cases be done no more than 7 days before or 24 hours after the admission of a patient. Physical examinations may be used from the previous hospitalization if the examination was within 30 days. A physical examination may be accepted from a physician’s office if the examination was within 30 days and meets the standards as defined by hospital policy and procedure. If the patient was transferred from another hospital, the physical examination may be accepted if the examination was done within 30 days, provided they are updated within 24 hours of admission or registration by the attending physician. In the above three cases, the attending physician must validate the examination in the medical record (on the physical exam) by noting that there are no significant findings or changes and signs and dates the report. Guidelines for contents of a complete History & Physical include: a. The Emergency Room documentation form may not be used as a History and Physical. b. A complete history and physical examination shall be recorded before the time stated for operation or the operation shall be canceled unless the attending surgeon indicates it is an emergency...
Words: 1448 - Pages: 6
...Guide to Individual Case Preparation Case Notes Template The following outline and question areas are intended as a guide to your thinking for case preparation. Some question areas, as noted, are required for each case, while others are relevant only for selected cases, depending on the content and focus of the case. You may use this template to guide your preparation of your individual notes on assigned cases. If your notes are handwritten, rather than typed, they must be submitted as photocopies as evidence you have prepared your notes before class. I. Current Situation A. Current Performance (required) How has the organization performed in recent years in terms of return on investment, market share, and profitability? (This section must be based on and present evidence of your conduct of appropriate numerical analyses of the firm’s market and financial performance i.e. ratio analyses and/or change (and percentage change) over time in key market and financial measures over time.) Your task is to conduct analyses and discover possible problems facing the company, not to just present data. What are the organization’s current mission, objectives, strategies and policies? B. Corporate Governance Who are the Board of Directors and what is their level of involvement in strategic management? C. Top Management What person or group constitutes top management? Have they established a systematic approach to strategic management? Are strategic decisions made...
Words: 1898 - Pages: 8
...206 Malayan Law Journal [2009] 1 MLJ Ernst & Young v Maxbiz Corp Bhd COURT OF APPEAL (PUTRAJAYA) — CIVIL APPEAL NO W-02–987 OF 2007 GOPAL SRI RAM, HELILIAH AND AHMAD MAAROP JJCA 30 APRIL 2008 Civil Procedure — Striking out — Action — Whether plaintiff would succeed on pleaded case — Whether appellate court could examine documents and facts to decide whether plaintiff had cause of action — Whether would amount to usurpation of function of trial judge Tort — Negligence — Duty of care — Three fold test — Whether it was fair, just and reasonable to impose duty of care — Whether meticulous examination of facts and circumstances called for A B C D E The plaintiff/respondent was jointly incorporated by two other companies, to take over the assets and liabilities and to inject capital into Geahin Engineering Bhd (‘Geahin’), a public listed company, which had become financially strained. The defendant/appellant was the auditor of Geahin and the adviser of the restructuring scheme. The plaintiff ’s case in the court below was that during the course of the restructure, the defendant had rendered advice to it upon which it acted to its detriment. However, the defendant contended that its advice was accompanied with a caution which sufficiently excluded the defendant from liability to the plaintiff and therefore sought an order to strike out the plaintiff ’s claim under O 18 r 19 of the Rules of the High Court 1980. The application was dismissed by the High Court...
Words: 1864 - Pages: 8
...In the case of Bayer v. Beran, 49 N.Y.S.2d 2 were the shareholders alleged two causes of action. In the first, the shareholders alleged a breach of fiduciary duty by the directors in connection with a program of radio advertising. In the second, they alleged a breach of fiduciary duty relating to payments made to a corporate vice-president and director. However, the court did not fine these to be so therefore dismisses the action. Joan can not bring against board for breach of contract as a shareholder but breach of contract violation nor fiduciary duties. The fiduciary must subordinate his individual and private interests to his duty to the corporation whenever the two conflict. Winter v. Anderson, 242 App.Div. 430, 275 N.Y.S. 373. In an address delivered in 1934, Mr. Justice, now Chief Justice, Stone declared that the fiduciary principle of undivided loyalty was, in effect, 'the precept as old as Holy Writ, that 'a man cannot serve two masters'. More than a century ago equity gave a hospitable reception to that principle and the common law was not slow to follow in giving it recognition. No thinking man can believe that an economy built upon a business foundation can long endure without loyalty to that principle'. The 'business judgment rule', however, yields to the rule of...
Words: 1500 - Pages: 6
