New Jersey V. Acton Case Summary

School officials’ strip searched Redding based off of a tip they received from another student at the school. Redding filed suit against the administrators who administered the search. She claimed that her Fourth Amendment rights of an unreasonable search were violated. A district court threw out the case but Redding appealed the case, which was threw out again on the initial appeal, but after being reheard a second time the court of appeals found that the young

Analysis of Kelo vs. New London The unpopular Supreme Court decision of Kelo vs. New London has broken many citizens trust in having secured property rights. In Kelo vs. New London, the City of New London was condemning the property of several homeowners, in order to sell the land to private developers that would use the land to make a retail condo development. The local government approved the new development in order to gain higher tax revenue and to bring more jobs to the area. Homeowners who believed that their waterfront residence was being unfairly taken contested the City’s actions in court.

The case was implied a Magistrate Judge, whose brief discoveries and recommendation completed up, and "the Pledge does not slight the Establishment Clause. " The District Court grasped that proposition and released the protestation on July 21, 2000. The Court of Appeals turned around and issued three separate choices talking about the benefits and Newdow 's standing. As it would see it, the offers court consistently held that Newdow has remaining as a watchman to challenge a practice that meddles with his qualification to facilitate the religious direction of his daughter. That holding managed Newdow 's remaining to challenge not only the game plan of the school locale, where his young lady still is enrolled, moreover the 1954 Act of

In the case of Brooks vs. Northwood Little League has little relevance to my profession as a future sports psychologist. Overall I do not think I will be in this exact situation but I can take some learning opportunities from this case. I learned in my case that anyone can be sued for negligence but you have to prove the four elements of negligence in order to win. In my case of Brooks vs. Northwood Little League, Brooks sued for negligence and lost her case. Brooks lost this case because she couldn’t prove all four parts of negligence.

Nabozny v. Podlesny (1996) was a case heard in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit regarding the protection of a school student in Ashland, Wisconsin, who had been harassed and bullied by classmates because of his sexual orientation. The plaintiff in the case—Jamie Nabozny—sought damages from school officials for their failure to protect him from the bullying. A jury found that this failure violated Nabozny's constitutional rights and awarded him $962,000 in damages.[1][2] Contents [hide] 1 Background 2 The case 3 Reception and significance 4 References 5 External links Background[edit] Jamie Nabozny (born October 1975) went to the local public middle school in the small Wisconsin town of Ashland, where his parents

Inside, he found cigarettes, rolling paper, a large amount of one dollar bills, a pipe, marijuana, an index card that appeared to be students that owed T.L.O. money, and two letters that applied that T.L.O. was selling marijuana in schools. T.L.O.’s mother was called by Choplick and was asked to take T.L.O. to the Police Office. She willingly did so. Because of her confessions and the evidence against her, New Jersey brought charges against her. In a local court, T.L.O. argued that her rights given by the Fourth

Three laws that have shaped and resolved the rights and services available to the students with disabilities will be discussed in this section. Section 504 of Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Individuals with Disabilities Act( IDEA )and The Americans Disabilities Act( ADA). The IDEA is the major federal statute providing educational rights to students with disabilities. Even so, two other statutes, Section 504 of the rehabilitation Act and ADA which was modified recently (ADA,2006,2008), also have implication for the disciplinary process when it involves students with disabilities ( Russo & Osborne, 2009). Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is the first federal civil rights law protecting the rights of persons with disabilities.

There comes a time in the criminal justice system where a law that was written to protect us will be challenged through a court case. That case will eventually make history and will become a reference in future cases with similar dilemmas. In 1983, one particular case met the criteria (Arizona vs. Youngblood). In this case, Larry Youngblood was convicted by a jury in Arizona of child molestation, sexual assault, and kidnapping of a ten-year-old boy. Both a criminologist for the State and an expert witness for the defendant testified as to what they believed the results were from the tests that were performed on the samples shortly after they were collected, they also commented on later tests performed on the samples from the boy’s clothing

The duty of any criminal prosecutor is to seek justice. A conviction is the end of justice being served prior to sentencing; however justice cannot be served if an innocent person is found guilty. Even though the prosecutor(s) are there to represent the public and has the duty to aggressively pursue offenders for violations of state and federal laws, they shall never lose sight or their own moral compass of their main purpose is to find the truth. In the pursuit of truth, the United States Supreme Court has developed or made rulings in reference to several principles of conduct which have to be followed by all prosecutors to assure that the accused person(s) are allowed the proper procedures and due process of the law granted by the 14th Amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated… We all know the fourth amendment. It's the amendment that guarantees our safety within our homes and our personal belongings. Yet, how much do you know about the fourth amendment? The fourth amendment is full of history, controversy, and discussion, even in modern day.

3. How did the defense attorney's attitude change as the trial process progressed (cite specific examples)? The defense becomes more confident as evidence that is more bogus was presented from the DA. For example, when he said that the children had not been abused and their thoughts on abuse and the satanic acts had been coached by the therapists.

Rosario”). However, the district court decided that the plaintiff violated the “Confidentiality Act,” which “permits disclosure of confidential communications of a minor between the ages of twelve and eighteen if…the therapist finds disclosure to be in the best interest of the minor” (“Dr. Rosario”). The courts also determined that he violated “The Reporting Act,” which requires school personnel to immediately report suspected child abuse to authorities (“Pesce v. J”). Dr. Pesce also violated the J. Sterling Morton High School District Employment Contract by not promptly reporting the incident, and therefore, putting J.D. in danger. In addition, the courts decided that Pesce’s rights were not violated (“Dr. Rosario”).

Colin Newmark was diagnosed with cancer. The cancer was life threatening. His parents were Christian Scientists and refused to consent for chemotherapy for Colin. Their refusal was protected under State Law as it exempted parents from the neglect and abuse statutes if the refusal was supported by medical reasons. The plaintiff, Child Protective Services petitioned to continue treatment for Colin.

Mary Ellen Kimble v. The Worth County R-III Board of Education In this scenario, I feel that the school’s success was highly dependent on their ability to provide “competent and substantial evidence” of Ms. Kimble’s “immoral conduct”(Mary Ellen Kimble v. The Worth County R-III Board of Education, p. 2).On three separate instances, Kimbell was found guilty of “untruthfulness and taking property not her own without consent or permission”(Mary Ellen Kimble v. The Worth County R-III Board of Education, p.7).

if it was held at school of course they would be expelled. After listening to the case i believe that the court made a good