Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Law Report Case Study
The Supreme Court of New South Wales heard the case Pastizzi Cafe v Hossain in mid-July of 2011. The case involved a variety of different legal issues -- issues that ranged from what constitutes a business partnership to whether a partner can end a corporation on her or his own without the consent of other partners. In this case, the main parties are Deborah Ross, Leonard Ross and Miraj Hossain and the three reached an agreement to create and administer a restaurant called Pastizzi Cafe Pty Ltd. There are a number of unique twists and fact in this particular controversy. To start, there is a Ms Ross who is guarantor of the partnership's initial funding, and she is a shareholder of the corporation as well. There is a Mr. Ross who is not a formal partner (his partnership is on hold for two years due to a break up with a former girlfriend,) and there is a Mr. Hossain and his company, Talukder Enterprises Pty Ltd. (Pastizzi Cafe v Hossain, 4). Mr. Hossain complains to the Court that Mr. And Ms Ross are making all business decisions while leaving him out of the decision-making...
Of course, Mr. And Ms Ross do not agree, since he can come to corporate meetings and since he has access to all the partnership's financial documents (Pastizzi Cafe v Hossain, 4). Another problem that complicates the case is the fact that Mr., Hossain sold his third of the partnership to Mr. And Ms Ross in late 2010. They disagreed on the value of the business at this time, however. To make matters worse, several months later, Mr. Hossain locks the Rosses out of the restaurant, changes the name, and ends the partnership. Because of this, Mr. And Ms Ross sue Mr. Hossain for lost profits and damages due to loss of the businesses goodwill (Pastizzi Cafe v Hossain, 5).
Though there are several interesting minor legal questions (the case involving Mr. Ross and his former girlfriend, for example,) the main legal questions involve the nature of the partnership, the right of Hossain kick the Mr. And Ms Ross off of his (and Pastizzi's) property and end the partnership, and the value of the business and the damages for lost profit and goodwill.
First, the Supreme…
Supreme Court of Mississippi. CASH DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, INC. v. James NEELY. Facts In 1973, James Neely started working for Cash Distributing Co., a company that distributed Anheuser-Busch products in several parts of the United States. The company had offices in Columbus, Starkville and Tupelo. During the 1990s, James Neely was heading the Columbus office. By this time, Anheuser-Busch started to look more closely at the way some of its rules were enforced,
Supreme Court Case Supreme Court Decision in Re Waterman, 910 2D (N.H. 2006) The Case The case addressed in this section of the report is that of Supreme Court case In Re Waterman, 910 A.2d 1175 (N.H. 2006). In this case, Tracy Waterman, working as a trooper for the New Hampshire State Policy was informed on August 29, 3003 that Vicky Lemere, the wife of one of Waterman's fellow troopers, informed Lieutenant Nedeau,
United States Supreme Court ruling on same sex marriage. The paper also examines how that decision impacted management policy decisions in terms of public safety administration. An examination of the ruling's overall impact on public policy is also given. Reactions on the ruling are given in the end. Background knowledge on same sex marriage For the majority of Americans, the matter of same sex marriage may have first come to their
HOLT V. HOBBS: PETITIONER'S SIDE OF THE CASE The objective of this study is to answer the legal question of whether the Arkansas Department of Corrections grooming policy violate the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act by preventing Holt from growing a one-half inch beard in accordance with his religious beliefs. Facts of the Case The petitioner in this case, Gregory Holt is who also known as Abdul Maalik Muhammad, an inmate
C.O.R.E. And Its Role in the Black Freedom Struggle Nearly one hundred forty years ago, a tall, and not very good-looking, bearded man stepped out onto a great, open field. His tired eyes wandered over the bloody ground, over the earth covered with corpses, over the scene of one of the greatest battles in American History, and his words rang out true and clear -."..Our fathers brought forth on this
Supreme Court's recent decision to ban the execution of mentally challenged individuals raises important ethical issues. Judges must be able to determine if a person is indeed mentally challenged. While the legal system and psychology have made important insights into this issue, there is still some inconsistency in the definition and application of mental retardation in the judicial system. Accordingly, an analysis of the ethical principles underlying the issue