Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Pharmasim case study
Case study BioPHarma, Inc
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Pharmasim case study
Case study BioPHarma, Inc
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The case that I have found to write about is the case of Shakeel “Blam” Wiggins and the New York Police Department in New York City which happened in September of 2013. This case was originally tried in the state of New York court in New York City. It was based on the fact that a NYPD cop didn’t properly fill out a search-warrant application that turned up a weapon as well as a handgun and a cocaine cache. Unfortunately, Mr. Wiggins is an accused drug dealer with a prior record and he may likely walk due to “a technicality.” Therefore, the New York City Police Department as well as the New York City police union were very upset because a dangerous person may be back on the streets due to a supple mistake.
Read Case 10-2, Welge v. Planters Lifesavers, on page 243. What theory of liability did Justice Posner use in finding the defendant liable? Judge Posner used the strict product liability theory in finding the defendant liable (Herron, 2011). Under the strict product liability theory, K-Mart (seller) would be held liable for defects in their products even if those defects were not introduced by them; also for failing to discover them during production (Herron, 2011).
Polly Ann Myers Polly Ann Myers and Autherine Lucy were trying to get admission to the University of Alabama. The university didn’t allow them to attend classes at the university. This was a violation to the Fourteenth Amendment. The situation with Polly and Autherine went to court. The case was called the Lucy v. Adams case.
In the case of Abbott Laboratories v. Portland Retail Druggists, the respondent brought an antitrust action against Abbott Laboratories claiming that they had violated the Robinson-Patman Act. The pharmaceutical manufacturers had sold drugs to not-for-profit hospitals at lower prices then to the commercial pharmacies (Showalter, pg 452). The Robinson-Patman Act of 1936, which was an amendment to the Clayton Antitrust Act (Elfand, n.d.), had made it unlawful to discriminate by placing a pricing difference between buyers of similar goods, when “the effect of such discrimination may be substantially to lessen competition” (Abbott Laboratories v. Portland Retail Druggists, 1976). As the petitioners, Abbott Laboratories claimed that the price
Julian wants to sue David, the other player. In his complaint, which tort theory is Julian’s attorney most likely to allege and what will he have to prove for Julian to be successful? Julian’s attorney is most likely to allege Intentional Tort for his complaint to be successful. An intentional tort occurs whenever someone intends an action that results in harm to a person’s body, reputation, emotional well-being, or property. During the game David kicked Julian in the head while Julian was in possession on the ball.
The court case Dred Scott vs. Sanford — 1856 to 1857 — was vital regarding the lives of enslaved or non-liberated African Americans. The outcome of this trial changed the perspective of slaves all across the United States. Rights concerning liberated and enslaved Americans from Africa were declared and enforced in this case. In 1833, John Emerson — a medical surgen of the US Army — purchased a slaved named Dred Scott.
In February 2005, nine-year-old Jessica Lansford was abducted, raped, and buried alive (Associated Press, 2007). John Couey, a convicted sex-offender, was deemed a person of interest given his residence's close proximity to the Lansford home and a shovel near a disturbed patch of his yard (Associated Press, 2006). During an interrogation in March 2005, Couey confessed to his crimes as well as revealed the location of Lansford's body. However, due to the detectives' blatant and deliberate disregard of Couey's requests for counsel, the confession was deemed inadmissible by the presiding judge (Associated Press, 2006). Throughout his interrogation, Couey expressed the desire to speak with a lawyer but was never granted access to one.
Dred Scott was a slave who sued his owner. He claimed he was free because his previous owner had taken him to Illinois (a free state) where he argued before the court that Congress had banned slavery by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. The state of Missouri ended up finding Scott was going to be a slave, even though the previous decisions by Missouri favored the Emancipation Proclamation because slavery has become very popular within expansion issues and compromise issues. The Dred Scott v. Sanford case is an early example of the Court’s involvement in race relations, new attitudes arise that would be changed by the Civil War, and the civil rights movement. Abolitionists were livid.
The Dred Scott v. Sanford case involved a lawsuit made by a slave name Dred Scott claiming that he should be granted his freedom. His claims were based on the argument that his master Dr. John Emerson had illegally held his during trips to Illinois and Wisconsin which were both free territories. With Dr. Emerson having died at the time of the lawsuit, Scott sued his widow. The lawsuit was ultimately taken on by her brother Sanford hens the name Died Scott v. Sanford. Unfortunately for Scott, he was not identified as a citizen because he was a African American.
The Canadian Supreme Court case R. v. Smith (2015 SCC 34) involves the accused, Owen Smith, not only producing edible and medical marijuana products but also selling it as well. Marijuana is prohibited under the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act with the exemption of medical marijuana in its dried form. Smith supplied medical marijuana derivatives that were not dried, such as cookies and ointments. In addition, Smith violated the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations, which restrict legalized possession of medical marijuana to dried marijuana. He was charged with possession and possession for purpose of trafficking.
Health Care Law: Tort Case Study Carolann Stanek University of Mary Health Care Law: Tort Case Study A sample case study reviewed substandard care that was delivered to Ms. Gardner after having sustained an accident and brought to Bay Hospital for treatment. Dr. Dick, a second-year pediatric resident, was on that day in the ED and provided care for Ms. Gadner. Dr. Moon, is the chief of staff and oversees the credentialing of all physicians at Bay Hospital.
A Civil Action is a movie based on a true story about an epic courtroom showdown where Jan Schlichtmann, a tenacious personal-injury attorney files a lawsuit against two of the nation's largest corporations. He accuses, Beatrice Foods and W. R. Grace Company for causing the deaths of children from water contamination by the illegitimate dumping of chemical wastes into natural water sources. The first issue brought up in this movie is concealing or misrepresenting of the truth also known as deceit. Deceit occurs when an individual withholds or misrepresents information by making false statements with the intent of altering another person’s position on a matter. In the movie, Jan does some personal investigations after he notices that there’s
Question 1 Klinger (plaintiff) can sue the hotel (defendant) for tort of negligence. Klinger has the legal right to claim damages. To establish negligence, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant: - had owed a duty of care, - breached the duty of care, and - caused damage due to breach of duty of care. To establish whether there was a duty of care, The Good Neighbour’s Principle can be applied. In which, in this case, foreseeability had to be present for the duty of care to exist.
I. INTRODUCTION In law of torts, there are many defences which the defendant can use against the plaintiff, when sued for specific torts. Negligence which is one of the most important tort has mainly three defences, namely, a) Contributory Negligence, b) Volenti fit non injuria, c) Ex turpi causa non oritur action.
The patient is an 84-year-old female who had a history of a fall approximately 2 weeks ago. She was seen in the ED at St. Joseph 's in Wayne at which time she had right hip and pelvic x-rays and also a CT of the of the hip. There was some question as to whether she had developed a fracture or dislocation of a previous hip prosthesis. The patient was in excruciating pain and was having difficulty ambulating. Her medical history is significant for diabetes mellitus, hypertension, Alzheimer 's disease, right hip fracture surgery back in January 2014.