Essay On Legal Writing Graded Project 2

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
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

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

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. В§

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

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

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

Alpine High School Jurisdiction Case Study
Statement of Jurisdiction The district court had jurisdiction of this action under 28 U.S.C. В§ 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. В§ 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

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 thejury'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

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. В§ 1415(k)(3)(A); 34 C.F.R. В§ 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. В§ 1415(k)(4)(B); 34 C.F.R. В§ 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

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 В§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,

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

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 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,

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

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.

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

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 theUnited 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

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 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

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

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

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

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...
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. 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

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
В§ 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 В§ 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

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.

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.

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 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

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

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

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. В§ 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

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...
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

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

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 IllinoisSupreme 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 IllinoisObscenity
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

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

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.

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

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 В§ 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. В§ 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

Essay On Legal Writing Graded Project 2

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Essay On Legal Writing Graded Project 2

Similar to Essay On Legal Writing Graded Project 2 (8)

More from Rebecca Harris

More from Rebecca Harris (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Essay On Legal Writing Graded Project 2