People v. Howard
Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. Cal. Sup. Ct., 34 Cal. 4th 1129, 104 P.3d 107 (2005) (1998) Brief Fact Summary. Howard (D) was involved in fleeing from the police in a high-speed chase when he ran into and killed another motorist. He was convicted of felony murder. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Driving with deliberate or gross lack of regard for the safety of persons or property while fleeing from a police officer who is chasing one is not an inherently dangerous felony under the felony-murder rule. ...

Blakely v. Washington
Brief

View this case and other resources at: Citation. ...

Homicide
StudyBuddy

CHAPTER 8 Homicide OVERVIEW Homicide is defined by the common law as the unjustified and unexcused killing of a human being. Most American jurisdictions in the nineteenth century divided homicide into two major categories, murder or manslaughter, and then subdivided these categories to reflect differences in available punishments. Murder was divided into first degree (for which a defendant could be executed) and second degree (which did not carry the death penalty). Manslaughter was viewed as a less serious killing and was not initially divided into degrees. However, over the years many sta ...

Unjust Enrichment, Restitution, and “Moral Obligation”
StudyBuddy

CHAPTER 9 Unjust Enrichment, Restitution, and “Moral Obligation” §9.1 INTRODUCTION Chapter 8 explained how promissory estoppel can sometimes be used to ameliorate the harsh consequences of consideration doctrine by enforcing a promise that induced justifiable reliance. Although the remedy of restitution is available in a variety of different situations, both within the bounds of contract law and beyond them, in one of its aspects it serves a purpose similar to promissory estoppel by allowing for the enforcement of obligations that do not qualify as contractual. Having drawn this genera ...

PAROL EVIDENCE AND INTERPRETATION
StudyBuddy

Chapter 6 PAROL EVIDENCE AND INTERPRETATION ChapterScope This chapter focuses on two areas dealing with the judicial construction of contracts: the parol evidence rule, and the interpretation of contract terms. Parol evidence rule: The parol evidence rule governs the effect of a written agreement on any prior oral or written agreements between the parties. Simplifying somewhat, the rule provides that a writing intended by the parties to be a full and final expression of their agreement may not be supplemented or contradicted by any oral or written agreements made prior to th ...

Table of Cases
StudyBuddy

Table of Cases Abbott Laboratories v. Granite State Ins. Co., 573 F. Supp. 193 (N.D. Ill. 1983) Adams Dairy Co. v. National Dairy Products Corp. 293 F. Supp. 1164 (W.D. Mo. 1968) Aldinger v. Howard, 427 U.S. 1 (1976) Alldread v. City of Grenada, 988 F.2d 1425 (5th Cir. 1993) Alliance to End Repression v. Rochford, 75 F.R.D. 438 (N.D. Ill. 1976) Allstate Ins. Co. v. Menards, Inc., 285 F.3d 630 (7th Cir. 2002) Alltel Communications, Inc. v. City of Macon, 345 F.3d 1219 (11th Cir. 2003) American Well Works v. Layne, 241 U.S. 257 (1916) Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986 ...

Table of Cases
StudyBuddy

Table of Cases A; R. v. Aaron; People v. Abbott v. Queen Abdallah; State v. Acosta; People v. Addington v. Texas Adjutant; Commonwealth v. Aiken; People v. Allen v. Ulster County Court Almeida; Commonwealth v. Alsondo; United States v. Alston-Graves; United States v. Alvarez; United States v. Anderson; People v.,447 P.2d 942 (Cal. 1968) Anderson; State v.,79 S.W.3d 420 (Mo. 2002) Anderson; State v.,227 Conn. 518, 631 A.2d 1149 (1993) Apollo Energies; United States v. Apprendi v. New Jersey Arizona v. Clark Arteaga; People v. Arthur Andersen, LLP v. United States Arzon; Pe ...

CAPSULE SUMMARY
StudyBuddy

CAPSULE SUMMARY This Capsule Summary is intended for review at the end of the semester. Reading it is not a substitute for mastering the material in the main outline. Numbers in brackets refer to the pages in the main outline where the topic is discussed. The order of topics is occasionally somewhat different from that in the main outline. Chapter 1 SOME BASIC ISSUES IN CRIMINAL LAW I. A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL LAW A. Felonies vs. misdemeanors: Modern criminal statutes typically divide crimes into two broad categories: felonies and misdemeanors. [1] A good general rule, at ...

The Separation of Powers
StudyBuddy

CHAPTER 7 The Separation of Powers §7.1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW The Constitution of the United States is the instrument by which “We the People” created a new national government. One of our great fears as a people, however, was that the authority of this new government might be abused by those who would handle the reins of power. The Founders therefore sought to structure the national government in such a way that no one person or group would be able to exercise too much authority. To this end, the Constitution apportions or divides the powers of the national government among three ...

Special Limitations on Judicial Review of State Laws
StudyBuddy

CHAPTER 4 Special Limitations on Judicial Review of State Laws §4.1 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW In Chapter 3 we saw that the ability of the federal courts to exercise the power of judicial review is constrained by the Article III case or controversy requirement and by the various justiciability doctrines that the Court has created in connection with it. In this chapter we explore five additional limitations that often arise when federal courts---and sometimes state courts---are asked to review the constitutionality of state laws. These limitations are the Eleventh Amendment, the Pullman doct ...

Table of Cases
StudyBuddy

Table of Cases Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner,387 U.S. 136 (1967) Adamson v. California,332 U.S. 46 (1947) Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth,300 U.S. 227 (1937) Air Courier Conference of America v. American Postal Workers Union,498 U.S. 517 (1991) Alabama v. Pugh,438 U.S. 781 (1978) Alden v. Maine,527 U.S. 706 (1999) Allen v. McCurry,449 U.S. 90 (1980) Allen v. Wright,468 U.S. 737 (1984) Altria Group, Inc. v. Good,555 U.S. 70 (2008) Alvarez v. Smith,130 S. Ct. 576 (2009) Amerada Hess Corporation v. Director, Division of Taxation,490 U.S. 66 (1989) American Insurance Association v. Gar ...

DUTY
StudyBuddy

Chapter 8 DUTY   This chapter covers several quite distinct scenarios where courts may hold that P cannot recover because D did not owe P any “duty.” The main concepts in this chapter are: Failure to act:  The law does not impose any general “duty to act.” Therefore, as a general rule, D cannot be liable for merely failing to give P assistance. (But there are many exceptions.) Effect of a contract:  Where the source of D’s duty to P lies in a contract, courts usually do not allow P to sue in tort for D’s failure to perform, and instead require that the suit be bro ...

INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST THE PERSON
StudyBuddy

Chapter 2 INTENTIONAL TORTS AGAINST THE PERSON   This chapter is concerned with four “intentional” torts that are committed against “the person” (as opposed to being committed against property): (1) battery; (2) assault; (3) false imprisonment; and (4) infliction of emtional distress. (In later chapters, we will consider non-intentional torts related to some of the torts discussed in this  chapter. For instance, we will consider the tort of negligent infliction of mental distress infra, p. 216.) Here are the key concepts in this chapter: Intentional:  Each of the torts ...

SOME BASIC ISSUES IN CRIMINAL LAW
StudyBuddy

CAPSULE SUMMARY Chapter 1 SOME BASIC ISSUES IN CRIMINAL LAW I. A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL LAW A. Felonies vs. misdemeanors:  Modern criminal statutes typically divide crimes into two broad categories: felonies and misdemeanors. A good general rule, at least for state as opposed to federal crimes, is that: a felony is a serious crime that is punishable by at least one year in a state prison; and  a misdemeanor is a lesser crime for which the maximum penalty is either: (a) incarceration for less than a year, typically in a city or county jail rather than in a state prison; ...

Case Overviews
Outline

I. REGULATION OF SPEECH BECAUSE OF ITS CONTENT Schenck v. United States (S.Ct. 1919) Facts: Ds mailed leaflets demanding that the public "Assert Your Rights" and peacefully express opposition to the draft during World War One. ...

Case Overviews
Outline

Flake v. Greensboro News Co. (1938) Facts: A picture of Flake was mistakenly used in an advertisement without her consent. ...

Case Overviews
Outline

Hawkins v. McGee (1929) Facts: A surgeon guaranteed that the plaintiffs hand operation would be 100 percent successful. The plaintiff sued for breach of warranty when the operation was not successful. ...