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).
Colin Newmark was diagnosed with cancer. The cancer was life threatening. His parents were Christian Scientists and refused to consent for chemotherapy for Colin. Their refusal was protected under State Law as it exempted parents from the neglect and abuse statutes if the refusal was supported by medical reasons. The plaintiff, Child Protective Services petitioned to continue treatment for Colin.
The problem arose when the parents were dissatisfied with the due process hearing;
At the end of this case, the court had this to
The caregivers lacked commitment, compassion, conscientiousness, fairness and honesty, and if they had taken their jobs seriously probably Tomcik wouldn’t have suffered as much. Trial began on July 22, 1991 and the decision was made on October 7, 1991. Tomcik’s total damage came out to be $85,000 according to the text. The defendants were proven wrong and they were charged. The court did the right thing, but I think a stricter action should have been taken against the defendants.
In conclusion, after contemplating the cases’ distinctive historical background, the sharply divided arguments that prompted the courts’ ruling, and the wide-reaching impact of that ruling, it is evident that this case was a turning point in American history. Despite differing opinions, the Supreme Court stuck to the Constitution in their decision that the government is not responsible for protecting children from their
Although, the picture the public failed to see at first ultimately led to a harsh and difficult lifestyle for these kids. Both judges were very demanding, for example in cash for kids, judge Ciavarella didn’t put up with any kid. Whether it was a small behavioral offense or a larger criminal offense, he treated it the same. Ciavarella
The court case, Kent vs. United States took place in 1966. This case was about Morris Kent, a 16-year-old boy who had been on probation since he was fourteen. Morris has just been arrested again for three counts of home burglary, three counts of robbery, and two counts of rape in the state of Washington. Because of the seriousness of his charges and the fact that he had been in court before, prosecutors attempted to have Morris tried in adult court. Because of this, Kent's lawyer told the judge that he had a mental illness while committing these crimes, he wanted Morris to stay in juvenile court, where the penalties would be much less severe.
Both men were successful in their appeals as a verdict of guilty could not be settled upon as the case was based on improbabilities and circumstantial evidence that could not lead to a definite
Rosario”). However, the district court decided that the plaintiff violated the “Confidentiality Act,” which “permits disclosure of confidential communications of a minor between the ages of twelve and eighteen if…the therapist finds disclosure to be in the best interest of the minor” (“Dr. Rosario”). The courts also determined that he violated “The Reporting Act,” which requires school personnel to immediately report suspected child abuse to authorities (“Pesce v. J”). Dr. Pesce also violated the J. Sterling Morton High School District Employment Contract by not promptly reporting the incident, and therefore, putting J.D. in danger. In addition, the courts decided that Pesce’s rights were not violated (“Dr. Rosario”).
Juana Barraza is a serial killer in Mexico. She was born on December 27, 1958 in Hidalgo, Mexico. As a child she had a thought life. Her mother Justa Samperio an alcoholic woman would exchange her to a man called Jose Lugo for a couple of beer. Barraza was sexually abuse; as a result she became a mother at the age of 13.
From the moment that the Dominican republic was free from Trujillo’s dictatorship, contrasting viewpoints have come up regarding the sacrifices of the Mirabal sisters. While some argue that the Mirabal sisters sacrifices were not beneficial and worthwhile to the revolution because it resulted in the orphaning of their children and three young lives were lost. Others argue that the Mirabal sisters sacrifices were effective for the revolution since it changed the future of their country. I deem the sisters sacrifices are justifiable because their sacrifices had an important purpose. Isn’t it true that Trujillo's was absolutely in power for 31 years however, because of the three young sisters his cruel regime ended.
The case made an impact on the treatment of juveniles today because juveniles now have four basic constitutional rights when they are to be
Department of Children & Families, Div. of Youth & Family Servs. v. T.B., 207 N.J. 294 at 301; New Jersey Dept. of Children and Families v. R.R., 436 N.J. Super. 53 at 60; New Jersey Dep't of Youth & Family Services v. J.L., 410 N.J. Super.
Issue: Kent was unaware of his case's transfer of jurisdiction from the juvenile court of D.C. to the state's regular district court. Was the juvenile court's waiver of jurisdiction valid? Would the individual transferred to the adult court still have rights that were applicable in juvenile court? Did the juvenile court conduct a full investigation for Kent? Important information might have been revealed had an investigation been performed.
