Legal Brief
Essays

Cook's Pest Control, Inc. v. Robert and Margo Rebar

Obscenity laws may seem like common-sense and well-intentioned and they often are. However, what one person finds offensive, informative or with a good point to make will vary quite a bit from person to person and it can be when speaking of something as basic as the statute David or the latest episode of Law & Order SVU. What is educational and what is just depraved differs a lot from person to person.

Anthony Alan Labriola v. Pollard Group, Inc., WA Supreme Court, 2004, No. 74002-0

Title and Citation: Suggs v. Norris. No. 364 S.E. 2nd 159. Court of Appeals North Carolina. 2 February 1988

The case of Mr. O'Neill and his widow's case against Montefiore Hospital is a fairly basic one but it poses a very relevant and pointed question. The question becomes where the line is drawn between the duty to provide…

In this case brief, the legal hypothetical focuses on a lawsuit by Mark Studley, an Olympic athlete, against Hotjox magazine. The lawsuit alleges a false light invastion of privacy based upon headlines that suggested that Studley appeared nude in the magazine. In order to determine whether Hotjox would have been entitled to summary judgment, the case considers the tort of false light invasion of privacy and the actual malice standard.