Customer center

We are a boutique essay service, not a mass production custom writing factory. Let us create a perfect paper for you today!

Example research essay topic: U S Supreme Court U S Court - 2,809 words

NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote

Business Law and The Legal Environment Court if Appeals may review orders from certain administrative agencies. The function of this court is to examine the record of a case on appeal and to determine whether the trial court committed prejudicial error. The court can either reverse or modify the judgment. The court may also send it back to the lower court or if there is no prejudicial error, uphold the lower courts judgment. The Supreme Courts the nations highest court whose principal function is to review decisions of the Federal Courts of Appeals and the highest state courts. This court consists of nine justices.

Cases reach the Supreme Court by two ways. One way is the court must hear a case if one of the parties requests the review, but very few come by way of appeal by right. The second way is by the Writ of certiorari, which requires a lower court to produce the record of a case it has tried. This happens when there is a federal question of substantial importance or conflict in the decision.

The special courts have jurisdiction over particular areas. The U. S. Courts of Federal Claims hears claims against the United States.

The U. S, Bankruptcy Courts hear and decide certain matters under the Federal Bankruptcy Code. The U. S. Tax Court has jurisdiction over certain cases involving federal taxes. The U.

S. Court of Appeals for the federal circuit reviews decisions of the Court of Federal Claims, the Patent and Trademark Office, patent cases decided by U. S. District Courts, the U. S. Court of International Trade, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the U.

S. Court of Veterans Appeals. The State Courts system consists inferior trial courts, trial courts, and appellate courts. Each of the fifty states has there own system and voters elect judges for a certain term. The inferior trial courts hear minor criminal cases such as traffic offenses and civil cases involving small amounts of money. They also conduct preliminary hearings in more serious criminal cases.

Usually there is no jury and the procedure is informal. An appeal is taken to the trial court of general jurisdiction where a new trial is begun. The decision of the previous court has no weight in this decision. Each state has trial courts of general jurisdiction.

These courts do not have a limitation on dollar amount in civil cases and hear all criminal cases other than minor offenses. Unlike inferior courts, these courts maintain records of their proceedings. Many states have special trial courts that have jurisdiction over particular areas. For example, family courts have jurisdiction over divorce and child custody cases. The appellate courts include one or two levels. The highest courts decisions are final except in those cases reviewed by the U.

S. Supreme Court. Review by this court is usually by right. Stare decision is the principle that states court should apply rules decided in prior cases in deciding similar cases. It applies to all those cases with the same facts, regardless of whether the parties and property are the same or not. The doctrine allows flexibility for the common law to change because says courts can correct errors in decisions or from choosing among conflicting precedents.

The doctrine presents problems when there are two parallel court systems. All courts are never to be bound rigidly by their own decisions. A decision of the U. S.

Supreme Court on a federal question is binding on all other courts. Although a decision of a federal court other than the Supreme Court is not be binding in a state court, but can be persuasive. A decision of a state court may be persuasive in the federal courts, but it is not binding, except where federal jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship. Decisions of the federal courts, except the Supreme Court, are not binding on other federal courts of equal or inferior rank unless the latter owe obedience to the deciding court. A decision of a state court is binding on all courts inferior to it in its jurisdiction.

A decision of a state court is not binding on courts in another state except where the latter courts are required, under their conflict of law rules, to apply the law of the first state as determined by the highest court in that state. We have two court systems in this country is to make sure that law is carried out efficiently and that it is fair and impartial. The First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redness of grievances. There is not absolute protection of free speech. Obscenity is a form that receives no protection.

Corporate political speech does receive protection and gives corporations the right to speak out on political issues. Commercial speech is expression related to the economic interests of the speaker and his audience, such as advertisements for a product or service. Speech proposing a commercial transaction is entitled to protection unless it is false and misleading. Defamation is a civil wrong or tort consisting of a false communication that injures a persons reputation by disgracing or diminishing the respect in which the person is held. Because defamation involves a communication, the protection extended to speech by the First Amendment applies.

Public figures who pursue a cause of action must prove that the publication of false statements where made with the knowledge of the defendant of its falsity. Private cases must prove that a defamatory and false statement has been made. A private case against the media must prove that the defendant published the defamatory and false comment with malice or negligence. A contract case study may involve the question that whether an offer is still open at the time of acceptance. Without the reply from the defendant, the claimant accepted the original offer.

However, the defendant had sold the iron to somebody else. Finally, the court holds that enquiry was just asked for more information, not a rejection, so the claimant still has right to accept the offer. Therefore the defendant was liable for breach of contract. Compare with above case, the same situation in our case. Todd's ltd wish to sue Jones & co. ltd as breach of contract.

Therefore the most important point is whether the offer is still open or not at the time when the claimant thought the defendant breach the contract. Firstly, Jones & co. ltd stated a offer to Todd's. It said that they can offer 1000 tons at 20 pounds per ton and payment to be on collection by the buy. After this offer was stated, Todd's replied and ask whether they can help to deliver at original price. Actually this is ask for more information.

Therefore, it did not revoke the original offer. Then, the offered is waiting for the information. After the company told Todd's that the can help to deliver at 25 pounds then the offered replied to accept the original offer. However, at this time, the offeror sold all other goods to someone else.

The original offer will not be revoked by just asking more information, so the offer is still valued at the time of accept by the claimant. Now I would like to dwell on some cases to understand what is our legal environment in the very core. Consolidated Freightways v. Iowa Is this an issue of economic protectionism or an issue that addresses safety and health concerns? Does Iowas concern over possible road wear warrant their statute? I feel that understanding Iowas justification is imperative in understanding if the statute under scrutiny is indeed guilty of violation.

In the proceeding paragraphs I will analyze these issues and the rules (including a citation from Fort Gratiot Sanitary Landfill v. Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources case) that apply to these issues. Throughout this you will see why I conclude that our judiciary system would rule Iowa in violation of the Commerce Clause. The main rule that applies to this case is the Commerce Clause.

In understanding the Commerce Clause, it is implied that there are limitations of the states authority to regulate in a manner that unduly restricts the free flow of interstate commerce. And without this clause, individual states could construct regulatory barriers against interstate commerce to provide local economic advantage (pg 118). Consolidated Freightways asserts Iowa with burdening interstate commerce by unduly restricting its free flow of interstate commerce. Due to the adverse effects of Iowas statute on freight carriers, it is required that the Supreme Court mediate this decision. In so, it is critical that the Court balance the need for national uniformity in law against the states interest in protecting its people from health and safety hazards (pg 118). With this, Iowa remains adamant that its law acts as a reasonable safety measure.

To illustrate the validity of their assertion, I now turn to the case of Fort Gratiot Sanitary Landfill, Inc. v. Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources.

In this case we learn the courts sustain that the Waste Import Restrictions discriminated against interstate commerce because of the ostensible protection it provided from out-of-state waste producers. The point that I want to make rests in Michigan's contention that SWMA and the Waste Import Restrictions was necessary to protect the health of their citizens. If this contention would have upheld for Michigan then it is they who would have had the favorable court decision. Because they didnt we must understand why. In Justice Stevens opinion, he states that Michigan has yet to prove that their health and safety concerns cannot be adequately served by nondiscriminatory alternatives. (pg 119).

He concludes that the Waste Import Restrictions unambiguously discriminate against interstate commerce (pg 119). In our case, to remain consistent with what our Supreme Court observes, there is a need to consider national uniformity in law. Iowa clearly differentiates itself from other western and midwestern states by adopting their unique statute and safety concerns. What makes Iowa so prone to more accidents? Empirical data to support an answer is beyond the scope of this class and my knowledge, but I have no further reason to believe that Iowa has more of a proclivity for dangerous transport than any other surrounding states. In our case I believe Iowa is unambiguously discriminating against interstate commerce.

I will rule out any speculation of economic protectionism. There is no economic benefit in discriminating carriers from transporting products and goods to and from a state. To address Iowas concern of road wear, I feel there is not enough validity in terms of empirical date or rationality. The local benefits of reduced road wear clearly do not exceed the burden this statute imposes on interstate commerce. The claims Iowa makes in the secondary issues are not sufficient to support the quintessential issue of whether or not Iowa is violating the Commerce Clause.

I assess that our judicial system will concur with my supposition. I base this on the fact that Iowas statute burdens interstate commerce, thereby, violating the Commerce Clause and Constitution. Lupita Glass V. Sandra Douge On Monday October 14 th at 3: 30 PM a ruling on Texas Justice by a Judge Larry Joe Doherty changed the lives of plaintiff Lupita Glass and the defendant Sandra Douge forever. Mrs. Douge is a landowner when a dead tree limb from her property broke falling on the parked car of Mrs.

Glass it caused 1, 200 dollars in damage, and much unneeded hardships. Mrs. Glass is suing claiming negligence, saying this could have caused not only 1, 200 dollars in asset harm but bodily injuries as well. Were as Mrs. Douge defends claiming comparative fault, trespassing on private property. Both women were very fired up and not ready to see the end result.

When Judge Larry Joe Doherty stepped out with his final note the court was silent, Mrs. Douge praying that she wouldnt have to pay someone she hated 1, 200 dollars, and Mrs. Glass hoping she would walk away gaining justice. Negligence, by keeping the dead tree on your land you are supplying a certain nuisance. Judge Doherty said to Mrs.

Douge. That was the ruling being a property owner you have certain duties of care, Judge Doherty didnt believe that Mrs. Douge acted in the reasonable person standard of landowners, when she failed to cut down her dead tree. This ruling by Judge Larry Joe Doherty to allow the plaintiff Lupita Glass to receive her compensatory damages of 1, 200 dollars was a lawful ruling. The defendant Sandra Douge had successful completed all four of the questions needed to be Negligence.

Did Mrs. Douge Owe the defendant a duty of care? Yes. Did Mrs. Douge breach that duty of care?

Yes. Did the plaintiff Mrs. Glass suffer a legally recognizable injury as a result of the breach of the duty of care? Yes. And were the actual damages a direct result of the breach of the duty of care? Yes.

In this case Lupita Glass V. Sandra Douge the Judge Doherty was correct in awarding the Plaintiff Lupita Glass 1, 200 dollars to fix her car. The Defendant Sandra Douge defended claiming Comparative Fault; all individuals are expected to exercise a reasonable degree of care in looking out for them selves. Mrs. Douge claimed if Mrs. Glass hadnt trespassed by parking her car on the street there would be no damages.

But there is an exception to the doctrine of Contributory Negligence, if the defendant missed the opportunity to avoid causing the damage under the Last clear chance rule, the plaintiff may recover full damages even if negligent. In this case Mrs. Douge trees on her land were dead for quite some time before a light wind broke the branch causing the damage to Mrs. Glass car. So even if Mrs. Douge wanted to claim trespassing she couldnt.

This business law class has thought me everything I needed to know to lawfully look at this particular court case. Before taking this class I would have watched this case and been on the side of Sandra Douge's. I would have believed that it was Lupita Glass responsibility to watch where and what under she parked her car, and I would have felt bad that Sandra Douge, just a happy land owner having to pay for damages, she didnt intentionally cause herself. Now being half way through Business Law I have a whole new out look, I now understand the ruling the reasoning behind it and completely agree with the judges decision. Sandra Douge was a negligent landowner who failed to hold up her Duty of Care to Lupita Glass. International business law also of vital importance for US exporters.

The carriage regulation is excellent example. A general ship or a common carrier is a vessel that the owner or operator willing carries goods for more than one person. There are three different types of common carriers. First is a conference line which is an association of seagoing carriers who have joined together to offer common freight rates.

Those that chose to ship all or a large share of their cargo through this process receives a discounted rate. Second is an independent line, which is when the vessel has their own rate schedules. Generally, independent lines have a lower rate than that of the conference discounted price. Finally the third aspect of common carrier is tramp vessels which are similar to independent lines by the fact that they have their own rate schedule, but they differ from both in that they dont operate on established schedules.

The next topic is the bill of lading, which is an instrument issued by an ocean carrier to a shipper that serves as a receipt of the contract of carriage, and as a document of title for the goods. The treaty that governs the bill of lading is the International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules of Law Relating to Bills of Lading. It is also known as the 1921 Hague Rules and the Brussels convention of 1924. The Hague Rules were extensively revised in 1968 by a Brussels Protocol. The amended version is known as the Hague-Visby Rules. Most countries are a party to the 1921 Hague Rules, and a few have adopted that Hague-Visby amendments such as France and the United Kingdom.

A bill of lading serves three purposes, First it is a carriers receipt for goods. Second it is evidence of a contract of carriage, and finally it is a document of title. This means that the person rightfully in possession fo the bill is entitled to possess, use, and dispose of the goods that the bill...


Free research essays on topics related to: commerce clause, u s supreme court, interstate commerce, u s court, sanitary landfill

Research essay sample on U S Supreme Court U S Court

Writing service prices per page

  • $18.85 - in 14 days
  • $19.95 - in 3 days
  • $23.95 - within 48 hours
  • $26.95 - within 24 hours
  • $29.95 - within 12 hours
  • $34.95 - within 6 hours
  • $39.95 - within 3 hours
  • Calculate total price

Our guarantee

  • 100% money back guarantee
  • plagiarism-free authentic works
  • completely confidential service
  • timely revisions until completely satisfied
  • 24/7 customer support
  • payments protected by PayPal

Secure payment

With EssayChief you get

  • Strict plagiarism detection regulations
  • 300+ words per page
  • Times New Roman font 12 pts, double-spaced
  • FREE abstract, outline, bibliography
  • Money back guarantee for missed deadline
  • Round-the-clock customer support
  • Complete anonymity of all our clients
  • Custom essays
  • Writing service

EssayChief can handle your

  • essays, term papers
  • book and movie reports
  • Power Point presentations
  • annotated bibliographies
  • theses, dissertations
  • exam preparations
  • editing and proofreading of your texts
  • academic ghostwriting of any kind

Free essay samples

Browse essays by topic:

Stay with EssayChief! We offer 10% discount to all our return customers. Once you place your order you will receive an email with the password. You can use this password for unlimited period and you can share it with your friends!

Academic ghostwriting

About us

© 2002-2024 EssayChief.com