Beaumont Independent School County Case Report

Beaumont Independent School County Case Report
We are the attorneys for the Beaumont Independent School District ("BISD" or the "District") and will represent the
District in any matter related to the above–referenced case. Please add the below names, addresses, emails, and fax
numbers to TEA's proof of service regarding this case. BISD hereby files its Notice of Insufficiency and Plea to the
Jurisdiction/Motion to Dismiss the Complaint in the instant matter. PETITIONER'S COMPLAINT IS
INSUFFICIENT The IDEA regulations require a due process complaint to contain a description of the nature of the
problem resulting in the complaint, including facts relating to the problem. A party may not have a hearing until the
party files a due process complaint that meets these requirements at 34 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
A due process complaint must contain, inter alia, "a description of the nature of the problem of the child relating to
such proposed initiation or change, including facts relating to such problem," 20 U.S.C. Section 1415 (b)(7)(A)(ii)
(III) and 34 C.F.R. Part 300.508 and "a proposed resolution of the problem to the extent known and available to the
party at the time." (20 U.S.C. Section 1415 (b) (7) (A) (ii) (IV).) "[A] party may not have a due process hearing until
the party, or the attorney representing the party, files a notice that meets the requirements of [20 U.S.C. Section 1415
(b)(7)(A)(ii)]." (20 U.S.C. Section 1415(b) (7) (B).) The recipient of a due process complaint must notify the Hearing
Officer and all other parties if it believes the complaint has not met the requirements of §1415 (b) (7) (A) (ii) within
fifteen (15) days of receiving the complaint. (20 U.S.C. Sections 1415(c) (2) (A) and 1415(c) (2) (C).) In accordance
with (20 U.S.C. Section 1415(c) (2) (D) and 34 C.F.R. Part 300.508 the Hearing Officer must notify the parties in
writing of its determination as to the sufficiency of the complaint within five (5) days of receiving the notice of
insufficiency. Whether a complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law
Judge. (Assistance to States for the Education of Children with Disabilities & Preschool Grants for Children with
Disabilities (Aug. 14, 2006) 71 FR 46,540–46541,
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Mr Sundstrom Case
As you are aware, on January 8, 2013, my estranged and mentally son filed a malicious mental health application
against me. I now refer to him as Petitioner. Petitioner, an attorney has a Princeton University Degree and a UVA Law
degree. For this reason FMRS granted Petitioner impunity. According to Mr. Sundstrom, Petitioner touted his first–
class education to insure FMRS employees granted his request. As a result, Mr. Sundstrom granted Petitioner's
request, ignoring many inconsistencies in the application. To quote the late psychiatrist, Dr. Gordon Livingston, If the
map doesn't agree with the ground, the map is wrong. Defying common sense, Mr. Sundstrom chose to believe the
map wrong, Mr. Sundstrom chose to forego asking the right questions and Mr. Sundstrom ignored my goddaughter's
information regarding the application's motive. My goddaughter, a therapist with FMRS's ACT team met me at the
Judicial Building on January 8, 2013. For the record, my goddaughter took personal time to attend the meeting with
Mr. Sundstrom. I ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
After promising to provide me with documents confirming Petitioner's allegations, Mr. Sundstrom did provide me
with the promised documents. As a result, I called Mr. Sundstrom the following morning. After asking about the
promised documents, Mr. Sundstrom responded, "Chermette can access the records. I said, "Chermette does not work
in the department that handles mental hygiene applications. More importantly, unauthorized access represents a
HIPPA violation. I plan to file a complaint with the DC Office of Disciplinary Counsel, unauthorized access would
taint the documents." Realizing Mr. Sundstrom did not offer to provide me the documents, I said, " I will stop by your
office and pick up the documents." Contrary to what Mr. Sundstrom said many times the prior day, "Well, I do not
have any documents. I only have a cover sheet with

Petitioner Executive Summary
Petitioner, Kannan S., b/n/f Vijayalakshmi and Kandasami S., by and through the attorney of record, Dorene J.
Philpot; Philpot Law Office, P.C.; 7314 Offats Pointe; Galveston, Texas 77551–1228.
Respondent, Beaumont Independent School District ("BISD" or the "District"), serves its Objections and Responses
Petitioner's (sic) First Request For Production of Documents. Pursuant to Texas Rules of Civil Procedure 192 and
196, BISD responds to Petitioner's First Request for Production of Documents as follows:
GENERAL STATEMENT The District's inquiry and research into the subject matter of this Complaint, and the items
requested and enumerated in Petitioner's First Request for Production of Documents are ongoing. The District intends
to conduct ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Respondent further objects that the request is overbroad, ambiguous, and lacks reasonable specificity. Subject to, and
without waiving, the foregoing general and specific objections see documents produced.
REQUEST #2: Documents related to communications, including but not limited to emails, letters, faxes and
handwritten notes, between any district employees and any outside service providers or experts or evaluators who are
not district employees, including any reports or recommendations written by any of the above–named individuals, as
they pertain to K.S. or the proposed classrooms, including but not limited to Mr. Edward Clouser. If no such
responsive documents are available, please state same in your

Essay on Legal Writing Graded Project 2
Brown v Board of Ed. Topeka Kansas (1954) by Alexes Mercado http://www.watson.org/~lisa/blackhistory/early–
civilrights/brown.html The 14th Amendment states: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject
to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or
enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state
deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. In the early 1950's, racial segregation in public schools was normal all
across America. Although all the schools were ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Another main argument was that "separate but equal doctrine" was not effective because the accommodations for
blacks' educational institutions were far inferior to those of white. Expert witness, Dr. Hugh W. Speer testified as
follows: "...if the colored children are denied the experience in school of associating with white children, who
represent 90 percent of our national society in which these colored children must live, then the colored child's
curriculum is being greatly curtailed. The Topeka curriculum or any school curriculum cannot be equal under
segregation." The Board of Education's defense was that segregated schools simply prepared black children for the
segregation they would face during adulthood. The Board further argued that segregated schools were not necessarily
harmful to black children because many great African Americans, such as Booker T. Washington, and George
Washington Carver had overcome more than just segregated schools to achieve what they achieved. They also added
that even though the 14th Amendment did not specifically include a ban on segregated education, at the time it was
enacted, there was no public education system in the country at the time. Therefore, they would argue that the 14th
Amendment would naturally not have addressed

Public Safety Outweigh Petitioner 's First Amendment Right
C. The interest of public safety outweighs Petitioner's First Amendment right to record.
Petitioner's recording posed an unreasonable risk to bystanders, passing motorist, and the police, essentially creating
an inherently dangerous situation. Kelly v. Borough of Carlisle, 622 F.3d 248, 262 (3d Cir. 2010). The Third Circuit
has firmly recognized that traffic stops are especially fraught with danger to police officers. Id. A traffic stop always
poses danger because of its unpredictable nature, but even more so, when a potential suspect is on the loose.
Petitioner was a suspect for a crime of several residential break–ins, which a reasonable office would assume is armed
and dangerous; thus creating a heightened risk to the officers' safety. Furthermore, the Petitioner was stopped on the
side of a road congested with traffic. If the officers do not maintain control of the situation, any unpredictable
movement could result in grave injury; therefore, the police officers acted reasonably by minimizing the unnecessary
danger added by Petitioner's recording during an already dangerous situation.
D. Petitioner's recording is not a matter of public interest that carried any expressive or communicative purpose.
The encounter Petitioner recorded is not a matter of public interest. Although there is a broad First Amendment right
to film matters of public interest, the extend of that right to film public officials have not been explicitly defined by
the Supreme Court or any other

Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Company, Petitioner...
LEGAL ANALYSIS 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS: Sheila White interviewed with Marvin Brown and obtained a job
as a "track laborer" with Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Company. Shortly after her hire date, however, she
assumed forklift operator duties. This new assignment still fell under the "track laborer" position description, and
White occasionally performed those duties although her primary responsibility was operating the forklift. Three
months into her new job, White complained to the company that her immediate supervisor was sexually harassing her
on the job. He was temporarily suspended and required to attend sexual harassment training. White was then
informed that she was being reassigned to track labor duties only. White ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
ETHICAL ANALYSIS 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS: Please refer to the Statement of Facts under Legal Analysis. 2.
ETHICAL ISSUE STATEMENT: Did Burlington allow one individual, Marvin Brown, to make an unethical business
decision to retaliate against employee Sheila White? 3. SUPPORT FOR ETHICAL ISSUES: As stated in the case,
Burlington did not "question the jury's determination that the motivation for these acts was retaliatory." Inferring that
this is an admission of guilt by Burlington, one can conclude that a deliberate business decision to retaliate
outweighed any legal ramifications. The job for which Sheila White was hired was by her own admission too tough
for her to perform. "I was moving spike cans that weighed 150 pounds; I was unloading plates and loading plates,"
she said. "On the forklift I was pretty much stable because I knew exactly what I was doing. But the date that they
took me off that forklift and put me in the yard to work with the mens, I didn't know the first thing about it. And
everything out there is hot and heavy. You could easily get killed or hurt out there." The facts stated in the case
indicate that White was not a forklift operator immediately upon hire but took on that job role within a few weeks.
(Obviously from her statement above, she was struggling from the outset to perform duties as a track laborer.) The
hiring manager, Marvin Brown, may have

The Case Of Pope V. Illinois
On July 21, 1983 local police detectives in Rockford, Illinois entered two different local book stores and purchased
six magazines. Soon after exiting the store, police separately arrested clerks Richard Pope and Charles Morrison.
Both men were charged and convicted for selling obscene materials, in accordance with an Illinois statute. On appeal,
both petitioners argued that the Illinois statute was unconstitutional to both the first and Fourteenth Amendments.
They reasoned that the state was required to make the value determination by an objective standard rather than
community standard in conformance with the Miller decision, and the juries in this case had been instructed to judge
whether the material had value as viewed by ordinary adults in the state of Illinois. The Appellate Court rejected the
both petitioners' arguments and the Illinois Supreme court denied requests for further review, but the United States
Supreme Court granted certiorari and merged both cases for reexamination.
The case, Pope v. Illinois, was argued on February 24, 1987. Glenn A. Stanko represented the petitioners whose
argument was: The Illinois Obscenity Statute violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments by allowing the value
element to be determined by community standards and instructing the jury to do so. Therefore, the convictions against
petitioners must be reversed because the statute is invalid. Glenn Stanko made it clear that the petitioners did not
argue whether the materials were

Argument Against The Affirmative Defenses
Without waiving the previous Objections and Motion to Dismiss and the Affirmative Defenses, the District provides
the following Response. Petitioner has filed a 28 page document. Only seven pages address Petitioner's actual issues.
In responding only to the allegations and proposed resolutions, the District reserves the right to contest any relevant
factual contentions during the hearing in this matter. The District also reserves the right to contest the sufficiency of
the Complaint within the applicable timelines. The District disagrees with many of the statements and allegations
presented in the Complaint. At this time the District will only generally respond to the factual issues presented and the
related requirements of the IDEA for ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In reality, as other Hearing Officers have found, there is no such distinction. For the sake of this response, the District
responds to the issues generally, and according to the described sub–issues listed by specific letters as follows: (Sub–
issue a): Did the District fail to implement the IEP as written or change the IEP without parental input? No. Under the
IDEA students are entitled to a free and appropriate public education which conforms to the student's individual
education program. Under the IDEA and federal precedent, one of the factors used in determining whether a school
district substantively and procedurally provided a FAPE to a student is whether the services provided to the student
conformed to his or her IEP as it was written. (20 U.S.C. § 1400). Under Rowley and state and federal statutes, the
standard for determining whether a district's provision of services substantively and procedurally provided a FAPE
involves four factors: (1) the services must be designed to meet the student's unique needs; (2) the services must be
reasonably designed to provide some educational benefit; (3) the services must conform to the IEP as written; and, (4)
the program offered must be designed to provide the student with the foregoing in the least restrictive environment.
While this requires a school district to provide a disabled child with meaningful access to education, it does not mean
that the school district is required to guarantee

The Court Of A Public Telephone Booth
On the date of February 4th, 1965, believing that the Petitioner had been using public pay phones to transmit illegal
gambling wagers from Los Angeles to Miami and Boston, the Federal Bureau of Investigation began their
surveillance into the life of the Petitioner, Charles Katz. Fifteen days later on February 19th, 1965 FBI agents
working the case against the Petitioner had gained access to a phone booth within a set of phone booths that the
petitioner frequented on Sunset Boulevard in Los Angeles, and summarily recorded the petitioner's side of
conversations he was having on the phone within a booth nearby. This surveillance lasted until the 25th (excluding
February 22, as no evidence was obtained due to technical difficulties) the date of the petitioner's arrest, which took
place immediately after he exited the same set of phone booths (Brief for Respondent 3). In this case there are two
major constitutional questions which need to be addressed: (1) whether evidence obtained by attaching an electronic
listening and recording device to the top of a public telephone booth used and occupied by the Petitioner is gathered
in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and (2) whether the search warrant used by the FBI officers in this case
violated the Fourth Amendment to the constitution in that the warrant was (a) not founded on probable cause; (b) an
evidentiary search warrant and (c) a general search warrant. While the Petitioner would like the answer to be yes in
both cases,

Due Process Hearing Summary
Respondent, Killeen Independent School District ("KISD" or "District"), submits its response ("Response") to
Petitioners' Motion Requesting Evidentiary Hearing and Ruling on Statue of Limitations ("Motion") and the District's
Motion to Dismiss ("MTD") Petitioners' understood Motion to Toll the Statute of Limitations in the above–entitled
and numbered case. INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Petitioners' filed a Request for Due Process
Hearing ("Complaint") on November 25, 2015, which set forth several alleged violations of the Individuals with
Disabilities in Education Act ("IDEA") which Petitioner's assert resulted in alleged denials of a free appropriate
public education ("FAPE"). The District filed Respondent's Answer to Petitioners' Request for Special Education Due
Process Hearing ("Response") on December 10, 2015. As an affirmative defense, the District's Response included an
objection to all claims barred by the one–year statute of limitations codified as 19 Tex. Admin. Code § 89.1151(c).
Petitioners did not seek to toll the statute of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
State hearing officers are Texas Special Education Hearing Officer Sharon M. Ramage has found that "The Texas
statute of limitations applicable to special education complaints provides that a parent must bring an action within one
year of the date the parent knew or should have known of the facts forming the basis for the hearing request. 19
T.A.C. § 89.1151(c); Texas Advocates Supporting Kids with Disabilities v. Texas Education Agency, 112 S.W.3d 234
(Tex. App.–Austin 2003, no pet.). Texas hearing officers have consistently applied the one year statute of limitations.
See, e.g., ***. v. Lake Travis ISD, Dkt. No. 329–SE–0603 (Sept. 2003); *** v. Houston ISD, Dkt. No. 332–SE–0603
(Jan. 2004)" (Student v. Hutto ISD; Docket No. 330–SE–0812 (2012).)(Emphasis

Case Shirley Jones Vs Calder
This case included the plaintiff Shirley Jones and the defendant Petitioner Calder. Shirley Jones felt as if she was been
libeled in an article that was written by the petitioners in Florida. The article that was written, accused Jones of a
drinking problem which affected her acting career. The article was actually written by Petitioner South. Calder went
over the article and edited in a way it could be published. Once the case was taken to court, both Petitioners Calder
and South decided to challenge California's personal jurisdiction due to neither one having any physical contacts with
California, particularly as it pertained to this article. Once in court, South did mentioned sources from California,
about Jones life and career and how

cases on labor law
JOSE Y. SONZA vs. ABS–CBN BROADCASTING CORPORATION [G.R. No. 138051. June 10, 2004] FIRST
DIVISION CARPIO, J FACTS: In May 1994, ABS–CBN" signed an Agreement with the Mel and Jay Management
and Development Corporation. ABS–CBN was represented by its corporate officers while MJMDC was represented
by SONZA, as President and General Manager, and Carmela Tiangco , as EVP and Treasurer. Referred to in the
Agreement as "AGENT," MJMDC agreed to provide SONZA's services exclusively to ABS–CBN as talent for radio
and television. ABS–CBN agreed to pay for SONZA's services a monthly talent fee of P310,000 for the first year and
P317,000 for the second and third year of the Agreement. ABS–CBN would pay the talent fees on the 10th and 25th
days ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Consulta failed to show that she worked definite hours. The amount of time, the methods and means, the management
and maintenance of her sales division were left to her sound judgment. Finally, Pamana paid Consulta not for labor
she performed but only for the results of her labor. Without results, Consulta's labor was her own burden and loss. Her
right to compensation, or to commission, depended on the tangible results of her work – whether she brought in
paying recruits. The fact that the appointment required Consulta to solicit business exclusively for Pamana did not
mean Pamana exercised control over the means and methods of Consulta's work as the term control is understood in
labor jurisprudence. Neither did it make Consulta an employee of Pamana. Pamana did not prohibit Consulta from
engaging in any other business, or from being connected with any other company, for as long as the business or
company did not compete with Pamana's business. The exclusivity clause was a reasonable restriction to prevent
similar acts prejudicial to Pamana's business interest. Article 1306 of the Civil Code provides that "[t]he contracting
parties may establish such stipulation, clauses, terms and conditions as they may deem convenient, provided that they
are not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy. There being no employer–employee
relationship between Pamana and Consulta, the

Alpine High School Jurisdiction Case Study
Statement of Jurisdiction The district court had jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because this issue
involves a federal question. The district court granted Defendant's motion for summary judgment on March, 2018.
Petitioner's filed their notice of appeal within the 30–day limit allowed by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)
(1)(B). This court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, which provides for review of all final decisions of district
courts. Statement of the issues Carlos: Under the First Amendment, did Alpine High School offend the Constitution
when it prevented Petitioner's potentially disruptive and divisive opinion article for publication in the school
sponsored newspaper? David: Did Alpine High School violate ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
After noticing a fierce division in the community over the recent political events, the school proactively created the
conference to both facilitate peaceful conversations about the political climate and to help teach the students how to
express their opinions in appropriate ways. This is not the first occasion in which Petitioner has had a submission to
"Our voice" be barred for publication. Throughout the past three years, Petitioner has submitted several articles to
"Our voice," out of which three have been rejected, including the current article in controversy, for containing
"threatening language," "graphic message" and "potential to incite violence." Meanwhile, the article in controversy,
The Truth About Trump, focuses on Petitioner's opinion of the "positive" aspects of the current presidency, while
employing violent, graphic, and divisive

Internal Revenue Service Case Study
Statement of Facts
Four residents from Virginia challenged the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) final rule and interpretation regarding
the implementation of the premium tax credit provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA).
The IRS' final rule authorized tax credits not only for purchases of on state–established health insurance, but also
purchases on the exchange established by the federal government, for states opted not to establish their own. The
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granted the government's motion to dismiss the case.
The four residents appealed, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the District
Court's decision. The residents appealed to the Supreme Court, and they granted certiorari. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The act allows for each state to establish its own exchange, or if the state chooses not to establish one, then according
to the ACA, the federal government will establish "such exchange." One of the provisions of the ACA is that
individuals are required to maintain health insurance coverage through an exchange or make a payment to the IRS,
unless the cost of the coverage would exceed eight percent of the individual's income. The ACA also provides tax
credits for any "applicable taxpayer" but as long as they sign up through "an exchange established by the state." The
IRS interpreted the act as allowing tax credits for taxpayers who signed up for either the state–established exchange
or the federal exchange. Virginia is one of the states that is part of the federal exchange. The four residents do not
believe they should receive the tax credits since they are in a state that is part of the federal exchange, and therefore
would not be required to maintain health insurance coverage since their cost would exceed eight percent of their
income
The issue and arguments on both sides of the

Abstract. Since 2003, Many Chinese Citizens Have Been...
Abstract Since 2003, many Chinese citizens have been detained in extralegal detention facilities throughout the
country known as "black jails." Detainees within these jails, which are created for the purpose of detaining petitioners
who seek rectification for problems at local and provincial levels of government, are subjected to a multitude of
physical and psychological abuses. This paper analyzes the conditions that caused these detention facilities to appear,
assesses the abuses and rights violations perpetuated by these jails, and offers several potential steps that American
policymakers can take to address this issue.Introduction In 2003, China abolished a state–sanctioned system of
extrajudicial detention known as "shourong." Since ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In recent years, the central government has prioritized reducing the number of petitioners that come to Beijing. In
order to do this, the State Bureau for Letters and Visits has begun to penalize officials that oversee ineffective local
and regional petition offices. These penalties are levied when these officials fail to resolve petitioners' complaints
before they advance them to higher–level offices; the punishments themselves can range from mild reprimands to
career–jeopardizing public criticisms. As a result of these penalties, officials have a financial incentive to curb the
flow of petitioners to Beijing. In response to this financial incentive, local and provincial–level officials have
developed a system of extralegal detention to ensure that petitioners are intercepted and secretly detained before they
are detected seeking legal redress in Beijing. Once petitioners are abducted, they are transported to black jails.
Government employees are sometimes involved in this process, but in most instances, abductions and detentions are
carried out by private security forces that are paid by local and provincial governments. Private enterprises are also
involved in the operation of these extrajudicial detention facilities as

Katz V. US Supreme Court Case Study
Case: Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) Facts: The Petitioner Charles Katz used a public phone booth in
order to place phone calls to transmit and receive gambling information and wagers across multiple state lines, which
is a violation of federal law. After extended FBI surveillance of the petitioner for illegal gambling activities, a
listening device was placed on the outside of the public telephone booth and recorded the petitioner's side of the
phone conversations. The recordings were submitted into evidence despite the petitioner objecting, citing fourth
amendment violations, which assisted in his conviction. The conviction was brought against the Ninth Circuit of
Appeals, and the conviction was affirmed deeming the external listening ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The petitioner appealed the conviction to the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted a certiorari hearing. Issue: – Is the
placement of an electronic listening device on a public place, namely a telephone booth, considered a search / seizure
in regards to the fourth amendment – The fourth amendment protects people, not places, does this protect the
conversations in a public location, but where the reasonable expectation of privacy is apparent. Holding and
Judgment: – Yes, the placement of an electronic listening device in a public location, but where a reasonable
expectation of privacy is upheld is a fourth amendment violation, which will require a warrant "search and seize" the
private conversations. – The conviction was overturned, the evidence against the petitioner was deemed to be a fourth
amendment violation and excluded from the case against him. Ruling: – When a person has a reasonable expectation
of privacy in their conversations, the conversations are protected by the fourth amendment. The government will
require a warrant to record these conversations to be able to admit them in court.

Case Study Of Workmen's Compensation Act
Case 1 (Under Workmen's Compensation Act) United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Alphonsa on 23 March, 1988
Summary The case is regarding the Workmen's Compensation Act. The case goes like this, the workman had died due
to chest pain while he was driving the vehicle that is the death was while he was in employment. And therefore the
compensation to be given was fixed as RS.23100. But the Counsel said that the workman had died not because of the
injury sustained in an accident, but it happened while he was under employment and therefore the employer is liable
to pay the compensated amount. The insurer is liable to pay the amount only of the employer becomes insolvent or if
the employer is an organization then at the time of winding up. But in this case no liability is fixed on the insurer to
pay the amount since the risk was covered by a policy. The provisions contained in Section 14 of the Workmen's
Compensation Act are attracted and in this view of the matter, in both the cases, it was held that the Workmen's ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Parry Agro Industries Ltd on 19 February, 2007 Summary The case titled "The Forest Range Officer vs. Parry Agro
Industries Ltd" is between the Forest Range Officer and the respondent, Parry Agro Industries Ltd. The case is
explained below. The land (mentioned in the case) was initially in the name of English and Scottish Joint
Co.operative Wholesale Society Ltd., later on the name was changed to Pari Agro Industries Ltd. And the petitioner in
the case is Pari Agro Industries Ltd.As per the plantation Labour Act 1951, the petitioner is the person who is
responsible to look after the estate, that is to provide water to the people who are staying in the Estate. Not only the
estate workers, there are other people who are staying in the estate such as telephone, forest guards etc. for this
purpose the petitioner has been taking water from a dam which has been constructed for the same purpose.

The Debate Between Mark Steyn And The Muslim Petitioners...
Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, everyone is guaranteed certain rights. One that stands out and is essential
to our society is the fundamental freedom of expression. Anyone can speak their opinion in public. However, the
government can in some instances limit these freedoms. The question that causes a lot of debate is in what instances
can the government genuinely limit people's rights while being justified in doing so. I believe the restrictions on
speech in Canada are appropriate. I believe that the government was correct in not intervening with the debate
between Mark Steyn and the Muslim petitioners because his article did not warrant enough to risk the safety of
Muslims, and by coercing Maclean's to post an opposing viewpoint would be a violation of their fundamental
freedom of expression. Per Mill's framework the government should not intervene in this case. Mill's belief is that
government intervention should only occur when there is physical harm. In this case, there is no physical harm, but
there is offence as Muslims are targeted by the article. Mill believes that if something is offensive, society cannot do
anything about it but avoid it or try to persuade the author to believe otherwise. The students attempted to persuade
Maclean's that the opinion stated in Steyn's argument was incorrect and hateful, and to post an opposing view but had
no luck. I believe the students should have then just informed people in Canada that Maclean's is offensive, and

270 S. W3d 13 Summary
The petitioner argues that the use of Briseno factors violates the eighth amendment because it may allow for the
execution of the intellectually disabled because they contradict the medically accepted definition of intellectually
disabled.
While appealing to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, the petitioner argued, "that the trial court erred in failing
to disregard the jury's answer to the mental–retardation special issue and in denying the appellant's motion for
judgment notwithstanding the verdict." 270 S.W3d 13 (Tex. Cr. App. 2010). The petitioner argued that "because he
introduced expert witnesses to demonstrate mental retardation and the State did not introduce its own expert
witnesses in rebuttal, the trial court should have disregarded the jury's answer to the mental–retardation special issue
or granted his motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict." 270 S.W.3d 13 (Tex. Cr. App. 2010). The Texas
court found that the burden of proof to determine intellectual disability fell to the petitioner and that there was "no
authority, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Cr. App. 2010). In making this decision, the Texas Court cites a previous case they had decided, Ex parte Briseno,
saying, "[a]lthough experts may offer insightful opinions on the question of whether a particular person meets the
psychological diagnostic criteria for mental

Court Proceeding Against Petitioners at the Women Health...
Procedural History: The Petitioners, who were antiabortion, Madsen and other protesters regularly protested the
Respondent which is the Women Health Center in Melbourne, Florida. The Women's Health center sought and was
granted by a trial court and injunction on several outcomes, which restrained the Petitioners' ability to protest. The
Petitioner's appeal to the Supreme Court which claimed that the injunction restricted the protester's right of free
speech that was protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution. Statements of Facts: Judy Madsen and
other protesters (the Petitioners) protest abortion clinics run by the Women's Health Center (the Respondents). The
protesters picketed and gave some sidewalk counseling outside the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Issues: What is the appropriate standard of review for evaluating on free speech aimed at protecting the rights of
women seeking abortion services? Do the expanded provisions of the injunction protecting the immediate
surroundings of the clinic unconstitutionally restrict petitioner's free speech rights? Do the restrictions establishing a
buffer zone around the homes of clinic staff violated the First Amendment? Answers of Holdings: Due to the
consent–neutral restriction, the Court determined that the terms of the injunction should be in which determining
whether they burden no more speech than is necessary to serve important state interests. The restrictions was upheld
and overturned in some parts. The Court found that the 36 foot buffer zone and the noise restrictions for the private
property around the clinic, then the 300 feet no approach zone, the protections around the clinic staff homes, and then
the objectionable imagery provision, claiming it restricted more speech than was necessary to protect important state
interests. Reasoning: Chief Justice Rehnquist explained that the restrictions at issue were content–neutral. In order for
it to be upheld, need only it is limited in such a way to prohibit only enough speech as is necessary to serve some
important government purpose. The restrictions on the noise level of the 36 buffer zone was reasonable for given the
difficulty of patients and staff in

Katz V. United States
Samantha Moyer
Tim Lindberg
POL 3231 Constitutional Law
17 November 2014
Katz v. United States (1967) On the date of February 4th, 1965, believing that the Petitioner had been using public
pay phones to transmit illegal gambling wagers from Los Angeles to Miami and Boston, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation began their surveillance into the life of the Petitioner, Charles Katz. Fifteen days later on February 19th,
1965 FBI agents working the case against the Petitioner had gained access to a phone booth within a set of phone
booths that the petitioner frequented on Sunset Boulevard in Los Angeles, and summarily recorded the petitioner's
side of conversations he was having on the phone within a booth nearby. This surveillance lasted until the 25th
(excluding February 22, as no evidence was obtained due to technical difficulties) the date of the petitioner's arrest,
which took place immediately after he exited the same set of phone booths. In this case there are two major
constitutional questions which need to be addressed: (1) whether evidence obtained by attaching an electronic
listening and recording device to the top of a public telephone booth used and occupied by the Petitioner is gathered
in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and (2) whether the search warrant used by the FBI officers in this case
violated the Fourth Amendment to the constitution in that the warrant was (a) not founded on probable cause; (b) an
evidentiary search warrant and (c) a general search

Petitioner V. Kulbicki Case Study
the court case Maryland, Petitioner v. James Kulbicki, James Kulbicki fatally shot his 22–year–old–mistress. Kulbicki
shot his mistress on the weekend before he was scheduled for a hearing on unpaid child support, which was tied into a
paternity suit between Kulbicki and his mistress. At Kulbicki's trial, which began in 1995, evidence was presented
that the bullet removed from the head of Kulbicki's mistress matched the bullet fragment that was left in Kulbicki's
truck. FBI Agent Ernest Peele, who represented the CBLA (Comparative Bullet Lead Analysis), presented this
evidence. Peele also examined a bullet taken from Kulbicki's gun. Even though the bullet in the victim's brain was not
an "exact" match to the bullet found in the gun, Peele assumed that the bullet from the gun was similar enough to the
first two bullets found. Using ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Kulbicki's file stayed in the state court until 2006, when Kulbicki added an additional claim that his defense attorneys
did not adequately question the legitimacy of the ballistics evidence presented by the CBLA. Kulbucki lost in the
state courts and then appealed to the Court of Appeals of Maryland. The Court of Appeals then vacated Kulbucki's
conviction based on the fact that Kulbucki's attorneys did not question the legitimacy of the ballistics evidence, thus
the defense attorneys did not provide Kulbucki with effective assistance during the trial. However, the Supreme Court
of the United States held, in a per curiam opnion, that the Court of Appeals based the decision to vacate Kulbicki's
conviction on contemporary views of ballistic evidence. Since there was no reason for counsel to investigate the
validity of the ballistic evidence in 1995, the attorneys provided effective assistance to Kulbicki because effective
assistance did not require attorneys to verify the legitimacy of the ballistic evidence (Maryland v. Kulbicki, 136 S. Ct.
2

Legal Writing Graded Project 2
IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF
SALLY BRIGHT PETITIONER
V. MEMORANDUM
JOHN BRIGHT RESPONDENT
Comes Petitioner, by counsel, and for her Memorandum states as follows: I. FACTS Sally Bright (Petitioner), filed
for divorce and custody of 14 year old daughter, Chastity. John Bright (Respondent) also requested custody. The court
ordered temporary custody of the minor child to Petitioner and visitation with Respondent every weekend. Petitioner
will be moving to another part of the country to take a job. Respondent has realized he is gay and has met a male
companion who doesn't reside with him presently, but someday might. Chastity testified that she feels weird around
Respondent's male companion. Psychologist, Dr. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The failure of a parent to comply with the provisions of this section may be considered as a factor if a change of
custody is requested by the noncustodial parent. In Reel v. Harrison, 118 Nev. 881; 60 P.3d 480; 2002 Nev., "First
Judicial District Court affirmed the trial court's determination that § 125C.200 violated the Equal Protection Clause of
the Fourteenth Amendment by restricting a custodial parent's fundamental right to travel. The trial court also
concluded that even if § 125C.200 was constitutional, the mother was still permitted to relocate the minor child to
New Jersey, based on the career and educational opportunities available... and the ability to maintain reasonable
visitation with the father". In McGuinness v. McGuinness, 114 Nev. 1431, 970 P.2d 1074 (1998) the Nevada
Supreme Court first applied the relocation standards to a case involving joint physical custody.
The Court again emphasized the importance of alternate visitation arrangements, reasoning that physical separation
does not necessarily preclude a parent from maintaining significant and substantial involvement in a child's life, and
noting alternate methods of maintaining a meaningful relationship, including telephone calls, e–mail messages,
letters, and frequent visitation. Id. at 1436. The Court went on to reverse

Supreme Court Case: Petitioner Jae Lee
This week we are examining the Supreme Court. While doing a little research I came across a case in which the
Supreme Court had decided to reverse the ruling. In the case, Petitioner Jae Lee was arrested on drug possession
charges with the intent to sell. In the case, Mr. Lee admitted the drugs were his and at the advice of his counsel took a
plea bargain. Lee was sentenced to a year and a day in prison under an aggravated felony charge. To add a little bit
more to this, Mr. Lee was only 13 when he came over with his parent from South Korea. In the 35 years, Lee spent in
the United States he never became a citizen. With this in mind when he was arrested for the aggravated felony charge
it is mandatory for him to be deported. The problem with

Petitioner V. Propria Persona
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
GARY BAPTISTE,
Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent. No. 09–62006–CIV–COHN/WHTE (06–60350–CR–COHN)
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO FED. RULES OF CRIM. PROC.
60(b)(4)
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION COMES NOW, Petitioner, Gary Baptiste, ("Petitioner"), in Propria Persona,
by way of this document, hereby gives notice to all whom it may concern, that he hereby moves for a Court Order to
grant relief from the final judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(4). This motion is based upon
this Notice, the following Points and Authorities, the Declaration of Gary Baptiste ("Petitioner"), the papers on file in
this matter, and such further evidence and argument as may be presented to the Court at or before the hearing.
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION...........................................................................................................1
SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................................................................3
FACTUAL BACKGROUND........................................................................................................................................5
ARGUMENT......................................................................................................................................................................
1. Due to the absence of Petitioner's Constitutional
Right of Due Process of the law under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, the judgment should
be considered void ...............................................6
2. Judgment should be vacated due to Ineffective Representation of Counsel in Petitioner's Trial of June
2007............................................................................................................................8
3. The Judgment should be vacated because but for
Counsel's unprofessional errors the outcome of of the proceedings would have been different; (Strickland v.
Washington, 466 U.S. 669 (1984).....................10
CONCLUSION...............................................................................................12
Cases
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
SUMMARY Petitioner, Gary Baptiste, was arrested on December 12, 2006 by federal drug enforcement agents; who
claimed to possess legally attained wiretap evidence of Petitioner's telephone conversations, which were later used in
Petitioner's Grand Jury Trial in August 2007. Petitioner, on several occasions, requesting the Court to produce and
permit the inspection of these "Valid" Federal Wiretap Applications and Order's, for the sole

On The Evening Of September 20, 2013, Petitioner, Howard
On the evening of September 20, 2013, Petitioner, Howard Hou, was arrested for violating the City of Aston's
panhandling ordinance and for possession of marijuana with intent to sell or distribute. Historically, a fairly small,
rural city in the state of Famlawdia, composed of an approximate population of 29,000 residents. After many years of
changes to the historically sleepy western city, the historic layout of Aston is preserved in the Aston Downtown
Square ("Square") at the heart of the city. The Square consists of four main streets, including Cove Street, Pine
Avenue, Rose Street, and Carol Street. On the northern side of the Square is Cove Street, comprising the majority of
the City of Aston and Hillside County government buildings, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The job market leveled out, and the city was unable to accommodate the number of people looking to work in Aston,
resulting in a drastic increase in the city's homeless and unemployed population. The city's extensive efforts to
revitalize the sleepy city into a thriving metropolitan had gone awry, as many homeless individuals began
congregating in large numbers in and around the Square. Business owners, residents, and visitors to the city began
noticing an increase in the number of homeless people panhandling and begging in the Square. Due to the increase in
homeless people assembling in and around the city's main attractions, local government officials began receiving
numerous complaints that people visiting the Square felt unsafe, particularly in the twilight and nighttime hours. As a
result, the restaurants and shops in the area experienced a sharp decrease in business, something many residents
ascribed to the unwanted harassment patrons experienced from panhandlers. Noticing that the city's panhandling issue
was having an impact on the city, residents petitioned the City of Aston government to enact an ordinance to address
the rising homeless population in downtown Aston. Heeding the residents' concerns, the Aston City Council
("Council") enacted section 06–79 of the Aston City Code ("City Ordinance") as a response to the panhandling
problem and as a means of discouraging the homeless from congregating near the Square.

Brief for Petitioner and Brief for Respondent Essay
In 2009, David Leon Riley was charged due to gang–related video found on his cell phone during the search upon
arrest. He argued that police's warrantless search on his cell phone has violated his Fourth Amendment rights.
However, the State of California affirmed the judgment. In the background of Riley's case, our group conducted a
survey to understand UC Davis students' thoughts about police searching on cell phones upon arrest. Eventually,
among the 50 persons surveyed, about half of them think the police do not have rights to search cell phones upon
arrest, while the rest think the police do have the rights. Moreover, when asked whether a person should be charged
for attempted murder based on the contents in their cell ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Brief 10). By mentioning the incapability of the digital contents in his cell phone, Riley revealed and emphasized the
fear of officers on the officer safety. He revealed the public fear of officer safety, but then released the stress derived
from fear of officer safety by saying "[contents in] cell phone are categorically incapable of threatening officer
safety" (Pet. Brief 10). And also, Our survey confirmed the public fear of safety. In our survey, about half of people
investigated, prefer a person to be charged for attempted murder. And, About 50 percent is a significant high level for
people surveyed thinking one should be charged for attempted murder. In the brief, Riley also revealed the police's
fear of the arrestee's destroying digital contents. He stated, "... once the police have seized and secured a smart phone,
there is no risk that the arrestee might destroy or alter its digital contents" (Pet. Brief 10). It shows the police's fear of
the risk of arrestee's destroying the contents in their cell phones, and reveal the desire of the police's willingness of
protecting the evidence in the cell phones as evidence. However, Riley also released the fear of arrestee's destroying
digital contents in their smart phones. He said that "[digital contents] should not be any danger" (Pet. Brief 10) and "
[as] long as the police prevent the phone from receiving a signal, the digital contents ... will

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Petitioner V....
Gyuhwan Park
February 11, 2016
Professor. Jonathan Martin
Legal Environment of Business
Brief Summary
Case Name: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Petitioner v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., No. 14–86
(2015)
Factual History: Ms. Samantha Elauf is a woman who is a practicing Muslim applied for a job at Abercrombie &
Fitch Co., which is a national chain of clothing stores. Elauf was interviewed by the store's assistant manager Heather
Cooke, and her interview so went well that it appeared to Elauf that she was going to get the job. Heather Cooke, the
store manager who interviewed Samantha liked her and recommended that she be hired. Cooke gave Elauf a rating,
which qualified her to be hired, however, she was concerned that her headscarf would conflict with Abercrombie's
employee dress policy. The headscarf that she wore according to her religious obligations conflicted with the store's
"look policy". Cooke turned to Randall Johnson, the district manager, and informed Johnson that she believed Elauf
wore her headscarf because of her faith. She wanted to determine whether or not the headscarf was in violation of this
policy. Randall Johnson informed Cooke that Elauf's wearing headscarf would violate the "look policy", and therefore
that Elauf should not be hired. As a result, Elauf didn't get hired by Abercrombie & Fitch Co.
Procedural History: The EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) sued Abercrombie on the behalf of
Elauf, claiming that Abercrombie's

Summary Of The Facts.. This Is A Case Involving Mrs. Lomanno
Summary of the facts.
This is a case involving Mrs. Lomanno and her husband Mr. Lomanno. Mrs. Lomanno, who is the petitioner, filed a
case contesting her liability for deficiencies or additions of tax for the year 1987 and 1988. The petitioner started
working in the 1986 as a dietetic director at Kaiser Hospitals and later that year after Kaiser ceased operations worked
for a nursing home as Director of Dieticians. In the year 1987, she started working as a sales representative for
Practor–Care, Inc. she was in charge of marketing nutrition and food computer software to institutions in Ohio,
Kentucky, Michigan and part of Pennsylvania, she ceased working in 1987 due to a difficult pregnancy she did not
return to work. In the year 1987 her ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The investigation brought about the dissolution of the firm. Mr. Lomanno became fearful that this investigation would
expose his embezzlement scheme. He decided to seek legal advice and he contacted a criminal attorney. The matter
was taken up with the office of the US Attorney. He confessed for all his wrong doings and was offered a plea bargain
which had a condition that he file his returns for the year 1986, 1987, and 1988 which had not being filed. The
income from embezzlement was reported as "other income" and was in tunes of $45,007 for 1987 and $15,005 for
1988. Because he did not want the petitioner to know about this, he prepared the returns alone and tried to hand them
in unsigned. The officers saw the unsigned part and wanted it signed. He went ahead and forged the signature of the
petitioner. The petitioner came to learn of her husband's embezzlement in the year 1990 through a probation officer
and through a letter received from IRS revenue agent. The couple divorced in 1991. Mrs. Lomanno petitioned to be
exempted from the tax return payments. In this case, the petitioner filed a subject motion for attorney's fees and
litigation costs.
The issues in the case.
The issue in this case is that the petitioner is contesting if knew of the tax returns and if she was aware of what the
husband was up to. She also wants to file for individual tax returns for the year 1987 and the year 1988. This

Expedite Due Process Hearing
TO THE HONORABLE HEARING OFFICER: COMES NOW, Respondent, Beaumont Independent School District
("District") files this Motion to Unexpedite Due Process Hearing and Vacate any Expedited Dates.
A parent of a child with a disability who disagrees with any decision by a school district regarding a change in
educational placement of the child based upon a violation of a code of student conduct, or who disagrees with a
manifestation determination made by the district, may request and is entitled to receive an expedited due process
hearing. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(3)(A); 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(a) (2006).)
An expedited due process hearing before a special education hearing officer must occur within 20 school days of the
date the complaint requesting the hearing is filed. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(4)(B); 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(c)(2) .) The
procedural right to an expedited due process hearing is mandatory and does not authorize a special education hearing
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Petitioner does not allege that the Respondent made a change in his educational placement based upon a violation of a
code of student conduct or that he disagrees with a manifestation determination. To the contrary, Petitioner is seeking
as his sole request for relief a "Law suit (sic) on Beaumont Independent School District for allowing my son JaCorian
to stay in a (sic) abusive classroom where he was assaulted." Petitioner is not disagreeing with a change in placement
based on discipline that would entitle Petitioner to receive an expedited due process hearing. Petitioner is disagreeing
with the teacher assigned to his classroom. Since the Petitioner did not allege facts that constitute a disciplinary
change of placement and thus that the mandatory provisions of Section 1415(k)(4)(B) for an expedited due process
hearing do not

God Is An All Loving By Michael J. Murray And Kurt Myers
Theists, people who believe in the existence of God, often are required to pray to God in order to obtain certain
benefits and provisions. It is believed that these things wouldn't come to God's believers unless they take the role as a
petitioner and pray. These believers know God to be an all–loving being. However, if this is the case, a major problem
arises for both atheists and theists alike; "Why would God bestow the good only if asked to bestow it" and "Why does
God not grant the good irrespective of whether some person ask for it?" Michael J. Murray and Kurt Myers attempt at
answer these questions in support of theism through "Ask and I Will Be Given to You." Although they do a great job
showing the benefits that arise from the use ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They do this through a peculiar example of a very dirty child who obviously has not had a bath in a while. When a
teacher speculates why this child is so dirty they are surprised to find out it is because the parents will not give their
children anything unless the children directly ask for it. So, unless the child asks for a bath, they will never receive
one. Why do the parents, our in our case God, require requests for certain benefits? Murray and Meyers explain that
there are two major reasons as to why petitionary prayer is required. Firstly, they explain that there is good that comes
from petitionary prayer that would not come about otherwise. Secondly, they explain that there is harm that would
come about without petitionary prayer that is worse then any harm caused by it.
Firstly, Murray and Meyers proposed that there are some serious benefits that come as results of petitionary prayer
that couldn't come about any other way. The first positive effect discussed in this article is that petitionary prayer
keeps the petitioner from worshipping idols. This is because, even if the petitioner's needs, such as the need for food,
could be met by sources other than God, such as a grocery store, God still is the ultimate provider. This is true given
that God created the foods that the grocery store provides. Therefore, the petitioner cannot look solely at nature and
other resources of provisions as their providers, but at God. Secondly, petitionary prayer allows

The Importance Of Related To The Cost Of Education
Under Code section 162, a taxpayer generally may deduct expenses considered ordinary and necessary in carrying a
trade or business. Code section 162 makes no mention of allowable education deductions. Treasury Regulation
section 1.162–5 specifically addresses whether expenses related to the cost of education are considered deductible.
Educational expenses are deductible under Treasury Regulation section 1.162–5 if
"Expenditures made by an individual for education... are deductible as ordinary and necessary business expenses
(even though the education may lead to a degree) if the education –
(1) Maintains or improves skills required by the individual in his employment or other trade or business, or
(2) Meets the express requirements of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Petitioner attended night law school classes and deducted the cost of the classes explaining the cost of classes was to
retain his status of a lawyer which was originally attained in a foreign country. The Internal Revenue Service
disallowed the deduction of the education expenses stating they are not ordinary and necessary expenses under Code
Section 162(a). The Tax Courts held that the petitioner was not considered a lawyer until the "completion of a formal
law school curriculum and passing Ohio's bar examination". In so holding, the Tax Court stated as follows: "In
essence, petitioner has commendably invested much of his time to meet the minimum requirements for qualification
in a new trade or business in this country, and the expenses thereof, being of a personal nature, cannot properly be
deducted from his taxable income for any of the years in question."
In O'Connor v. Comm. , petitioner studied law in Germany, but was a U.S. citizen. He completed the requirements to
practice law in the United States, and then attended law school and was awarded his Juris Doctorate. While residing
in the United States, petitioner was employed as a property manager. He then passed the New York bar exam.
Petitioner deducted the expense of his law studies. The Internal Revenue Service disallowed the deductions under
Treasury Regulation section 1.162–5 stating the expenses were not used to maintain or improve skills in his
employment. The Tax Court sustained the Internal Revenue

Petitioner Powl Pros And Cons Essay
Petitioner Powell was one of seven African–American youths who were convicted of raping two white women. While
traveling on a freight train the defendants got into a fight with a group of white youths, which resulted in the
defendants throwing the white young men from the train. Two white girls who were aboard the same freight car
alleged that six of the seven African–American boys had raped them. At trial, the defendants did not receive the
opportunity to consult with their attorneys until right before the proceedings were initiated. Throughout a sequence of
trials, all of the defendants were convicted and sentenced to death. The defendants contended that the state had denied
them Due Process and the right to counsel through their negligence

Assignment 2: Due Process Paper
Issue b. The district failed to devise appropriate IEPs for the student.
Denied. On April 20, 2105, a date agreed upon with Travis's mother, the parties attended a ARD committee meeting
to discuss continued placement and services until such time that a comprehensive evaluation could be completed. At
this time, the District has assigned approximately–trained professionals to conduct the agreed–up and parentally
approved assessments. Once the assessments are completed, the ARD committee will appropriately consider the
results and develop an appropriate educational program reasonably calculated to provide Travis with educational
benefit in his least restrictive environment.
Again, it would appear from the plan language of the complaint, that Petitioner's issue b is that the District failed to ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The Hearing Officer has no jurisdiction to rule on whether Petitioner is, or is not, entitled to attorney's fees under the
IDEA, nor whether he is entitled to attorney's fees under any other law. The District requests that all claims for
attorney's fees be struck and dismissed.
3. The request for due process hearing is to state the issues for hearing. The request reserves the "right to supplement"
the request once the Student's education records are received. There is no right to supplement the request for hearing.
If the Petitioner attempts to change the issues for the hearing, and the Hearing Officer allows amendment of the due
process hearing request, all timelines, including the resolution period will start over again.
4. The District denies that Petitioner is entitled to any of the relief requested, including private placement or
reimbursement for private placement. If Petitioner seeks to amend the request for hearing to add additional relief, all
timelines, including the resolution period, begin again assuming the Hearing Officer allows amendment.
5. Petitioner is not entitled to the appointment of an expert at public expense under 34 C.F.R. §

Sandwich Blitz Unit 4
The respondent is very unreasonable and combative. See EXHIBIT 4, text messages at 6:32 p.m. on 12/6/16, in a
simply communication by respondent to petitioner and the children, she explains to petitioner "...you might have to
get the kids..." the petitioner inquires as to "...why can't you..." pick up the kids, she begins with arguing by stating
"Since your dad is making a big deal...". This is her common reaction to things. Our son Ryan replies with "No one is
making a big deal" and "He was just asking a question". See EXHIBIT 5, a string of emails on 11/4/16, 11/17/16 and
11/30/16 to respondent's attorney asking for responses to requests for repsondent's Employee Plan Information,
Joinder, Preliminary Declaration of Disclosures, proposed "Parenting

Petitioners Motion To Dismiss: Case Study
I. The District Court's denial of Petitioners' Motion to Dismiss is reviewed de novo, and may be affirmed on any
ground that is supported by the record. Am. Int'l Enterprises, Inc. v. F.D.I.C., 3 F.3d 1263, 1266 (9th Cir. 1993).
Under a de novo standard of review, the appellate court reviews a decision on a question of law anew, and need not
give deference to the legal conclusions or assumptions made by the previous court to hear the case. Trinity Indus.,
Inc. v. Ashland, Inc., 53 S.W.3d 852, 868 (Tex. App. 2001). An appeals court may refer to the trial court's record to
determine the facts, but may rule on the evidence and matters of law without deference to that court's finding. Id.
District court rulings on a motion to dismiss under Federal

Application Of The Gps Monitoring Program
aterial Facts Petitioner Torrey Dale Grady was convicted for sexual related offenses in 1997 and 2006. Petitioner
pleaded guilty towards his indictment of taking liberties with a child, which he committed when he was seventeen
and was sentenced to serve thirty–one to thirty–eight months in prison. Upon being released after serving his sentence
for the crime committed in 2006 the petitioner was called to a hearing on May 14, 2013 North Carolina to determine
whether or not he would be subjected to join a global positioning system monitoring program. Under North Carolina
General Statutes 14–208.40 it requires any individual found to be a recidivist sex offender must be ordered to partake
in the sex offender monitoring system. Grady raised objections to the program arguing because of the unreasonable
searches the structure of the program allows that his Fourth Amendment rights would be violated. The purpose of the
GPS monitoring program enforced by the Division of Adult Correction is to manage the risk assessment of
individuals who enter into public society after having been imprisoned. As participants in the Satellite Based
Monitoring (SBM) program created under North Carolina General Statutes 14–208.40, each individual is required to
continually wear a GPS ankle monitor. The ankle bracelet must be worn twenty–four hours a day for the rest of the
wearer's life. Each day the wearer must connect the bracelet to a charging socket in the wall for a total of six hours
everyday.

Petitioner's Case Report
On the morning of August 18, 2013, Petitioner had attached a GoPro on his surfboard before going to the beach with
his two friends. (R. at 3). Later that afternoon, Petitioner and his two friends were subject to a traffic stop by Sergeant
Cagney and Officer Lacey. (R. at 9). Sergeant Cagney had been alerted of a string of residential break–ins and
believed that the three young men fit the description of the three break–in suspects. (R. at 9). In addition, Officer
Lacey noticed Petitioner's friend's bicycle did not appear to be in compliance with the New Motor Vehicle Code. (R.
at 9). Since they were potential suspects, Cagney questioned them concerning their activities that morning. (R. at 13).
As Cagney questioned them, Petitioner began

EB-2 Immigrant Summary
Summary:
EB–2 classification is a status request professionally skilled, non–residents can use to petition for permanent US
citizenship.
Body:
Non–resident individuals, who hold certain professional degrees, are eligible to apply for EB–2 classification. Other
basic requirements to qualify for this status are for the applicants to exhibit remarkable skills in the fields of science,
art or business that will considerably improve the national economic agenda.
EB–2 Visa Eligibility
When a job exists, that requires fulfillment by an individual with a degree of learning higher than the bachelor's level,
a qualified non–resident applicant may apply for an EB–2 visa to fill the position. The request must contain the
petitioner's official school transcripts that show they have qualifying educational credentials from an accredited
United States institution of higher learning, its foreign equivalent or a combination of both. The petitioner must also
provide proof of a minimum of five years of advanced work history in the field the visa will permit allow to the
petitioner to pursue.
EB–2 Visa Categories
An EB–2 visa falls under three classifications – the EB–2(A), EB–2(B) and EB–2(C) grouping. These groupings suit
different professional skill sets, backgrounds and experience levels.
The ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This class is a national interest waiver, and petitioners must prove that the United States will benefit by granting the
request. A national interest waiver requests that officials approve the visa, while setting aside the employment history
requirement that is normally a prerequisite for an EB–2 visa. Petitioners can make this request without the aid of a
United States company. They have to fulfill to same conditions required for an EB–2(B) visa and must prove that
allowing them permanent residency is in the best interest of the United

Beaumont Independent School County Case Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Brenda Higgins

More from Brenda Higgins (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Beaumont Independent School County Case Report