Mantor was able to avoid either signing up or openly refusing to participate in the AIRP for three years.…
Korb v. Raytheon, 707 F. Supp. 63 (D. Mass) case involves an employee, Lawrence J. Korb and Raytheon Corporation the company. “Korb was terminated from his position as vice president for Washington operation of Raytheon Corporation because he publicly expressed opinions, which was a conflict of interest with the corporation’s economic concern” (http://www.loislaw.com.libdatab.strayer.edu/pns/index.htp). The case involves freedom of speech, information and challenges with the employment law. The case of Korb v. Raytheon allowed the public to view the relationship between Raytheon and the influence regarding the Department…
Citation: SPECTRUM STORES INC, Plaintiffs - Appellants v. CITGO PETROLEUM CORPORATION; SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY, doing business as Saudi Aramco; Defendants - Appellees. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. 632 F.3d 938 (2011)…
The Korematsu v. United States (1944) case was an unjustifiable case towards individuals with a particular race, but even though at the moment it seemed like the appropriate action to take for the protection of the people in our country, the action towards this race was completely inappropriate and unconstitutional. During the War of World War II, the president of the United States, Franklin Roosevelt put a float the Executive Order 9066 that targeted individuals from the Pacific Coast of Japanese ancestry both citizens and non-citizens. The order was to get any individual with in the area of the Pacific Coast to report to assembly centers where they were being detained until released by military authorities. Individuals with Japanese ancestry were being imprisoned without any evidence that they were a danger to the country and were deprived from their Constitutional rights. At first the first order was for any individual with Japanese ancestry to stay in their home with a curfew assigned to them, without…
3. Browne & Assoc., a San Francisco company, orders from U.S. Electronics, a New York company, ten thousand electronic units. Browne & Assoc.’s order form provides that any dispute would be resolved by an arbitration panel located in San Francisco. U.S. Electronics executes and delivers to Browne & Assoc. its acknowledgment form, which accepts the order and contains the following provision: ‘‘All disputes will be resolved by the State courts of New York.’’ A dispute arises concerning the workmanship of the parts, and Browne & Assoc. wishes the case to be arbitrated in San Fran- cisco. What result…
Facts: The parties to the lawsuit are Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation (the defendants) and the National Labor Relations Board (the plaintiffs). The National Labor Relations Board found the Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation to violate the principles of National Relations Act of 1935. Thus, they decided to charge and order Jones & Laughlin, the executives of the Steel CORP, to drop all practices within their corporation that violated the principles of the National Labor Relations Act and to follow their ultimatum. Furthermore, Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp denied the National Relations Boards petition, and instead opted to take the dispute to the Circuit Court of Appeals. Here the case was undecided because the court argued that cases as these…
Hussein v. Raban Supply Co, 95-15914 (United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit 03 04, 1996).…
2013 WL 425598 Page 1 [2013] UKSC 5 [2013] 2 W.L.R. 398 [2013] 1 All E.R. 1296 [2013] 1 All E.R. (Comm) 1009 [2013] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 466 [2013] 1 B.C.L.C. 179 Official Transcript [2013] UKSC 5 [2013] 2 W.L.R. 398 [2013] 1 All E.R. 1296 [2013] 1 All E.R. (Comm) 1009 [2013] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 466 [2013] 1 B.C.L.C. 179 Official Transcript (Cite as: 2013 WL 425598) [2013] UKSC 5 VTB Capital plc v Nutritek International Corp and others On appeal from: [2012] EWCA Civ 808 SC President Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, and Lord Reed Judgment given on 6 February 2013 Representation • Appellant Mark Howard QCPaul McGrath QCIain PesterTony Singla (Instructed by Herbert Smith Freehills LLP ). • 2nd Respondent Michael LazarusChristopher Burdin (Instructed by SJ Berwin LLP (up to 1st December 2012) and Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson (London) LLP (from 1st December 2012)). • 4th Respondent Mark Hapgood QCStephen Rubin QCJames McClelland (Instructed by by SJ Berwin LLP (up to 1st December 2012) and Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson (London) LLP (from 1st December 2012)). Judgment Lord Mance Introduction 1 The appellant, VTB Capital plc (“VTB”), is incorporated and registered, and authorised and regulated as a bank, in England. It is majority-owned by JSC VTB Bank (“VTB Moscow”), a state-owned bank based in Moscow. The first, second and fourth respondents are, respectively, Nutritek International Corp (“Nutritek”), Marshall Capital Holdings Ltd (“Marcap BVI”), both British Virgin Islands companies, and Mr Konstantin Malofeev, a Russian businessman resident in Moscow said to be the ultimate owner and controller of both, as well as of the third respondent, Marshall Capital LLC (“Marcap Moscow”), a Russian company which has not been served. 2 The present case arises from a Facility Agreement dated 23 November 2007 (“the Facility Agreement”) entered into between VTB and a Russian company, Russagroprom LLC (“RAP”), under which VTB advanced some…
The legal topic at hand is the forum-selection clause. This clause comes from the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act article 2b section 110. The forum selection clause limits jurisdiction for the parties who enter into an agreement containing the clause. The enforceability of the forum selection clause came to question through the case of Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co in 1972. Despite having a forum-selection clause, courts refused to decline jurisdiction on the basis of forum non convenience. Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co is a precedent setting case which is now used frequently as a way to work around the necessity to adhere to a forum-selection clause. Now the question has arose, what happened to the strength of the forum-selection clause particularly for online based agreements.…
“The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.”…
The law of Directors Duties stems from the systems of corporate governance in order to ensure that the persons occupying higher positions within the company will take good care of the company, as well as not act in a way that will create deficiency. There are 3 sources to the legal duties: the common law; the principles of equitable fiduciary duties; and the statutory duties stated under the Corporation Act section 180-183(Harris,J., 2008).…
Before persuasion of the necessity of the death penalty can be discussed, it must be established exactly which type of crime deserves an “award” of capital punishment. “U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals defines "heinous crime" to mean murder, assault, kidnapping, arson, burglary, robbery, rape or other sexual offense. "Heinous criminal" means a person who has been convicted of a heinous crime or who has been found not responsible for the commission of such a crime by reason of mental disease or defect.” (ECLIPSE ENTERPRISES v GULOTTA) If an individual decides that doing wrong is the more applicable choice, they are, or at the very least, can be deemed immoral or unethical. If the intention of the deed is good then the deed is in and of itself good, thus ethical. “Kant says that these beliefs should be based upon principles, and not a deity.” (Johnson) Keeping this in mind, the intention of the deed, and not the…
EASTERN SHIPPING LINES, INC., vs. POEA (166 SCRA 533, G.R. No. 76633, October 18, 1988)…
Whether or not the Benguet Consolidated Inc is covered by the orders of the COURT.…
Conclusion: non-negotiable bills of lading to their shippers and retain the originals. Terms on the reverse side of the originals which are not on the non-negotiable bills may not apply.…