...Assignment Nadel et al. v. Burger King Corp. & Emil, Inc. case 1. What court decided the case in the assignment? (2 points) COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, HAMILTON COUNTY 2. According to the case, what must a party establish to prevail on a motion for summary judgment? (3 points) Emil moved for summary judgment, claiming that no genuine issue of material fact existed. BK also moved for summary judgment and pointed to evidence in the depositions that appellants knew the coffee was hot and that coffee was purchased and served as a hot beverage. It also contended under the circumstances that Evelyn's and Paul's actions were intervening, superseding causes precluding any actionable negligence on its part. 3. Briefly state the facts of this case, using the information found in the case in LexisNexis. (5 points) Christopher Nadel received second degree burns from coffee spilling on his right foot purchased at Burger King by his grandmother Evelyn Nadel. The Nadel’s brought suit against Burger King and franchise owner Emil, Inc, for product liability for a defectively designed product and for failure to warn of the dangers of handling a liquid served as hot as their coffee. The court granted both the Burger King owner and Burger King Corporation request for motion of summary of judgments. The Nadel’s appealed. The court affirmed in part and reversed in part. The summary judgment was wrongly granted on the products liability and related...
Words: 1465 - Pages: 6
...Demurrer would be the appropriate pre-trial motion to file if the complaint did not state a valid cause of action (valid claim) even if all the allegations contained in the complaint were true. True False Identify which, if any, of the underlying occur during the informal discovery phase of a lawsuit: Depositions Interrogatories The actual trial Both A & B None of the above One of the types of pleadings that Defendants file in response to the plaintiff’s complaint is called the answer (which is also referred to as the response). True False Identify which, if any, of the below circumstances can occur as a result of an appeal: The appellate court can reverse the trial court The appellate court can affirm the trial court The appellate court can remand the case to the trial court Any of the above Does it ever occur in a lawsuit that the defendant stipulates to the plaintiff’s factual allegations? Yes No The quantum of evidence required for a verdict in a civil case is identical to the quantum of evidence required for a conviction in a criminal case. True False The jury hears the evidence presented at trial and decides the facts that are disputed in the lawsuit. The jury is instructed to follow the law given by the judge and then to attempt to reach a final verdict. True False If a judge incorrectly instructed the jury on the law, could this be the basis for a successful appeal of the verdict? Yes No A plaintiff is the party who initiates a lawsuit...
Words: 1809 - Pages: 8
...Case Brief Norman Utley, Plaintiffs v. MCI, INC., MCI WorldCom Communications, INC., & MCI Network Services, INC. F/K.A MCI WorldCom Network Services, INC., Defendants. Civil action no. 3:05-CV-0046-K Facts: This is an age discrimination case arising out of MCI's decision to terminate twenty (collectively “Plaintiffs”) former MCI’s Employees. This resulted from a reduction in force ("RIF"), where the companies declining financial condition, compelled a reduction in costs of its operations between 2001 and 2004. On January 6, 2005, those former employees filed suit against MCI alleging that MCI termination was a violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. Of those twenty, nineteen made it to trial, where the court then granted MCI’s motion to separate the trials and divided Plaintiff’s into six groups based on the different organizations for which they worked. Three of MCI’s motions for summary judgment were denied, two discriminations claims, and one retaliation claim, for judgment evidence did not show a genuine issue of material fact. Issue: 1....
Words: 593 - Pages: 3
...Law Case Analysis According to the law case EEOC v. FREEMAN, the EEOC filed a law suit against Freeman and alleged the company’s hiring policy which includes criminal background and credit history checks, has a disparate impact on African-American, Hispanic, and male applicants. And the material fact of this case is whether Defendant’s hiring criteria of conducting criminal background and credit history checks is consistent with business necessity. Since the Defendant was charged by the EEOC with unlawful discrimination in this case, the source of law is the Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964. “Title VII prohibits discrimination in hiring, firing, trainings, promotion, discipline, or other workplace decisions on the basis of an employee or applicant’s race, color, gender, national origin, or religion” (Bennett- Alexander & Hartman, 2011). As a federal law enforcement agency, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has obligations to investigate violations of Title VII and enforce laws against discrimination in workplace. In addition to the EEOC’s unique role, Title VII requires federal district courts to take the Title VII discrimination case for judicial review only after the EEOC has first disposed of the claim (Bennett- Alexander & Hartman, 2011). And according to the case, since the EEOC accepted applicant Katrina Vaughn’s discrimination complaint about Defendant’s violation of Title VII by rejecting hiring her based on her credit history information, the...
Words: 1296 - Pages: 6
...to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense (U.S. Const. amend. VI). In today’s society, the Supreme Court has decided that the Sixth Amendment also means in federal courts, counsel must be provided for indigent defendants unable to obtain their own attorneys. The Supreme Court has made many decisions shaping the Sixth Amendment into what it is today while keeping it close to its original intent I believe. Some of the influential cases are: Johnson v. Zerbst, Betts v. Brady, Gideon v. Wainwright, Argerisnger v. Hamilton, Faretta v. California, and Strickland v. Washington. I decided to highlight these decisions because I believe they are good examples of how the Sixth Amendment has been interpreted and sculpted to fit in today’s world. Indigent felony defendants in federal court are entitled to court-appointed counsel, decided in 1938 in Johnson v. Zerbst (Neubaur & Fradella, 2014). Then in 1942 we had the Betts v. Brady decision, in that case, the justices had ruled that indigent defendants need only be provided with a lawyer under special circumstances (Summary of the Decision, n.d.). Meaning indigent defendants in noncapital...
Words: 842 - Pages: 4
...DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISCTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ESTATE OF ROLAND ROHM, by its Personal Representative, Geraldine Livermore, Plaintiff, vs. Case No. 1:04-CV-552 Hon. Richard Alan Enslen DANIEL LUBELAN, individually, JOHN JULIN, individually, JERRY ELLSWORTH, individually, STEVE HOMRICH, individually, DAVID BOWER, individually, jointly and severally, Defendants. _______________________________________/ Of Counsel: HILL AND ASSOCIATES, LLP DeClercq Druminski & Perlman James D. Hill (P88332) Anthony J. DeClercq Attorney for Defendant Attorney for Plaintiff 161 N. Clark St. 55171 Pacific Ridge Drive Chicago, IL 60601 Macomb, MI 48042 (913) 706-9986 (586) 321-7630 JamesDonaldHill@gmail.com decler16@msu.edu January 12, 2002 DEFENDANTS’ BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Authorities........................................................................................................ii Issues Presented...............................................................................................................1 Statement of Facts...........................................................................................................1 Summary of the Argument..............................................................................................3 Standard of Review...............................................
Words: 3221 - Pages: 13
...Appeals Cases from 1913 Project ID: FOCUS - 1 of 1 DOCUMENT REBECCA KOOP, Plaintiff-Appellant, - vs - SPEEDWAY SUPERAMERICA, LLC, et al., Defendants-Appellees. CASE NO. CA2008-09-110 COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT, WARREN COUNTY 2009-Ohio-1734; 2009 Ohio App. LEXIS 1469 April 13, 2009, Decided PRIOR HISTORY: [**1] CIVIL APPEAL FROM WARREN COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. Case No. 07CV69537. CASE SUMMARY: PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Appellant personal injury victim filed suit against appellee store alleging that it was negligent in its cleaning of a coffee spill, upon which she slipped and fell. The store filed a motion for summary judgment. The Warren County Court of Common Pleas (Ohio) granted summary judgment for the store. The victim appealed. OVERVIEW: The victim argued that the trial court erred by failing to consider the incident report and corresponding witness statements. The appellate court held that the trial court did not err by disregarding the document due to its lack of authenticity. There was no indication that the document, purported to be an employee witness statement, was sworn or certified, nor was there any evidence presented to establish its authenticity by affidavit. Further, the incident report, and the alleged corresponding witness statements, did not meet the admissibility requirements of Civ. R. 56, and therefore, were not entitled to consideration by the trial court for summary judgment...
Words: 3758 - Pages: 16
...BUSI 301 COURTROOM OBSERVATION PAPER Indiana Northern District Court Case Number 82a04-8876-cv285 Plaintiff: Deborah White Plaintiff representatives: Walsh Jackson and Amanda Babott Defendant: Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern Defendant Representatives: Benjamin Walton and Jordan Van Meter Defendant Council Overview: Jordan Van Meter and Benjamin Walton are representing the defendant who is Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern. The representing defense suggests that the Court give a summary judgment to John Daniels who was the bartender at O’Malley’s Tavern. The Plaintiff is seeking damages from the defendant, Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s tavern stating that Mr. Gibbs had knowledge of Mr. Hard’s intoxication. The Indiana Law. Ind Code Ann 7.1-5-10-15.5 2006 does require that a defendant have actual knowledge in order to recover damages. Constructive knowledge does not satisfy the presumption, only subjective knowledge. Circumstantial evidences cannot support constructive knowledge, but only actual knowledge. According to the 7th circuit court of Indiana, visible acts of intoxication are subjective. The bartender himself only saw Mr. Hard sitting on a stool drinking whiskey which is not an uncommon occurrence in a bar. The case that was cited in the courtroom, the Ash Lock case (Ashlock v. Norris, 475 N.E.2d 1167, 1170 Ind. Ct. App. 1985) was not as severe as this case. This specific bartender at O’Malley’s Tavern did not have actual knowledge of...
Words: 1625 - Pages: 7
...Marshall decided to challenge the protection guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. c. Provide a summary of the opinion of the Court in this case: The Court ruled that all people deserve equal protection. Although black and white areas were built equally, segregation...
Words: 2008 - Pages: 9
...attend? (e.g. sentence, summary trial, committal hearing, jury trial, mention, call-over etc) I attended a sentence hearing for the matter R vs Williamson. His Honour Judge D Frearson SC presided. The defendant had pleaded guilty prior to this hearing on 15th October 2013. 3. What were the charges against the defendant? Were these summary or indictable offences? How did you know this? Williamson entered a guilty plea to four major charges related to cheating and defrauding Health Services Union (HSU), creating false documents with the intention to deceive, and the recruiting of others to hinder a police investigation. Of these four charges, Williamson was charged with two counts of Director Cheat and Defraud which, which according to s.176A of the NSW Crimes Act 1900 No 40 carries a maximum penalty of ten years, one count of Officer Publish False Statement which carries a maximum of seven years according to s.192H of the Act, and two counts of Recruiting Another to Assist in Carrying out a Criminal Act s351A(1) of the Act. There were four forms of this count each carrying a maximum penalty of seven years per form. In Australian common law jurisdictions (New South Wales, South Australia and Victoria) an indictable offence is an offence that is tried on an indictment where an individual has been formally accused of a crime and those charges must be brought before a court due to the more serious nature of the offence compared to that of summary offences (Findlay et...
Words: 2691 - Pages: 11
...it, and c. fails to exercise reasonable care to protect them against the danger. Section 343A of the Restatement provides: a possessor of land is not liable to his invitees for physical harm caused to them by any activity or condition on the land whose danger is known or obvious to them, unless the possessor should anticipate the harm despite such knowledge or obviousness. Sections 343 and 343A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts preclude liability for a possessor of land where an invitee is injured as a result of a condition whose danger is known or obvious to the invitee, unless the possessor anticipated the injury despite the invitee’s knowledge or the obviousness of the condition. Restatement (Second) of Torts §343A(1). As the cases below illustrate, where a danger is “open or obvious,” the possessor of land does not owe the invitee a duty to take precautions against or warn of open or obvious dangers. Under Pennsylvania law the assumption of the risk doctrine applies to absolve the landowner from liability for injuries sustained if the plaintiff: (1) knows of the risk or hazard, and (2) voluntarily proceeds in that activity. There is substantial uncertainty as to the status of the assumption of the risk doctrine in Pennsylvania. Which party bears the burden to establish these elements is currently the subject of debate in Pennsylvania courts....
Words: 4686 - Pages: 19
...Statement for the Defendant (Mediation). 1. Parties attending the Mediation Case a. The plaintiff, Carmen L. b. The defendant, Juanita Solis. c. Ms close Jones, a key witness d. Mr. Dennis Watson, a key witness 2. Brief Summary of Facts The plaintiff and the defendant are sisters. The plaintiff was drinking whiskey and cola as she talked to the defendant. She spilled whiskey and slipped when she got up. As a result of the fall, Carmen suffered a severe back injury. The plaintiff commenced this mediation case suing the restaurant of negligence. The siblings of the defendant have also raised alarming claims against the defendant. They claim that being given the job by their mom was a misdeed and that the defendant is ripping the family apart. The sources of these happenings are strongly attributed to the lat will left by the parents of the parties. The plaintiff expected to be named as the manager of the restaurant because she has worked in the business for around eight years. Following, the pass over, the plaintiff resolved to heavy drinking of alcohol the circumstance leading to the accident. 3. Claim and defense to counter the claim The plaintiffs claim lies on the basis that the restaurant was negligent. However, the defendant disputes these claims as the circumstances underlying the accident solely lie on the responsibility of defendant as confirmed by the summary of facts. With regard to the plaintiff’s claims, the defendant seeks justification...
Words: 659 - Pages: 3
...Wysocki, individuals d/b/a The Fray, and Epic RECORDS, Plaintiffs, v.CHARLES Washburne, Defendant. | )))))))))))) | Civil No. 13-037 P-H | PLAINTIFF’S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF ITS RULE 56 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: COMES NOW ISAAC Slade, JOE King, DAVE Welsh, and BEN Wysocki, individuals d/b/a The Fray, and Epic RECORDS, Plaintiffs, and move for summary judgment against Defendant Charles Washburne, and in support thereof show the following: INTRODUCTION 1. Plaintiffs are ISAAC Slade, JOE King, DAVE Welsh, and BEN Wysocki, individuals d/b/a The Fray, and Epic RECORDS; defendant is CHARLES WASHBURNE. 2. Plaintiffs sued defendant for copyright infringement. 3. Defendant answered asserting a general denial and the affirmative defense of fair use. 4. Discovery in this suit ends April 30, 2014; trial is scheduled for July 1, 2014. 5. Plaintiffs respectfully request that the court grant their motion for summary judgment and deny the Defendant’s motion. summary judgment standard 6. Motions for summary judgment are governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 which provides that a summary judgment shall be rendered if the evidence properly before the court indicates that "there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." STATEMENT OF THE CASE Plaintiffs, Issac Slade (“Slade”), Joe King (“King”), Dave Welsh (“Welsh”), and Ben Wysocki...
Words: 5092 - Pages: 21
...IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION IN RE: : CASE NO. 04-60600 : ROY JESSE LISATH, : CHAPTER 7 STEPHANIE MYLO LISATH, : : JUDGE HOFFMAN Debtors. : : SSN: (LAST FOUR DIGITS ONLY) 0486 : SSN: (LAST FOUR DIGITS ONLY) 9643 : ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RODELL RAHMAAN, : Adv. Pro. No. 05-02049 Plaintiff, : vs. : ROY J. LISATH, aka ROY JESSE LISATH,: Defendant. : PLAINTIFF’S RENEWED MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT Now comes the Plaintiff, Rodell Rahmaan (hereinafter “Rahmaan”), by and through his undersigned attorney, and respectfully MOVES this Honorable Court for the entry of JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT against the Defendant, Roy J. Lisath, aka Roy Jesse Lisath (hereinafter “Lisath”), for the relief demanded in the Complaint, specifically that any judgment later obtained by Rahmaan upon those claims which are the subject matter of that certain civil action entitled Rodell Rahmaan v. City of Columbus, et al., designated case number C2-02-989, pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, be DECLARED to be excepted from discharge upon the grounds set forth in 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(6), namely for willful and malicious injury. This Motion renews a Motion for Default Judgment previously served and filed on March 15, 2005, denied without prejudice by...
Words: 4159 - Pages: 17
...Facts: Mary Lee Immormino and her husband purchased food from the drive-thru window at McDonald. The item purchased included a hot tea for Mary Lee Immormino who was a front seat passenger. Mary Lee Immormino accomplished a series of actions to steep her tea; unfortunately, she spilled the tea on her lap. Plaintiff Mary Lee Immormino decided to bring suit because of an alleges injury caused by hot water spilled from a cup served by defendant J&M Powers, Inc., d.b.a. McDonald’s fast food franchise. Plaintiff's complaint alleges three causes of action: 1. Defendant was negligent by serving a beverage that was too hot; 2. Defendant failed to warn consumers of the temperature of the beverage; and 3. Defendant placed the beverage in an unsafe...
Words: 327 - Pages: 2
