Alexandria Harper's Case Summary

On evening of June 9th 1959 in a small town named Clinton Ontario, a couple of hundred kilometres from London, Ontario, a fourteen year old Steven Truscott gave twelve year old classmate Cheryl ‘Lynne’ Harper a ride home on the crossbars of his bicycle, the pair rode along the Country Road. What occurred after this is still unknown, and is still debated due to the wealth of questionable information from varied sources. Around 11:20pm, Lynne’s father had notified officials of his daughter’s disappearance. Just two days later, Lynne Harper’s body was found in a forested area just next to the County Road. Lynne Harper had been sexually assaulted and strangled to death.

Reporter stated the following: The incident is ongoing according to patient, Christie Sewell. Christie states residing with her spouse and 13 year old daughter Skylar. Also in the home is Christie's elderly mother. Christie states that she has been an alcoholic for some time, but the past few weeks have been bad (alcohol consumption).

Spoke with Jade Bray, CHR therapist with regarding to Valerie treatment. This writer questioned Ms. Bray about her concerns and the mental health provider intervention for the patient due to the 3 suicidal ideation as a result of stresses in the patient's life. According to Ms. Bray, she expressed her concerns of the patient not following through with recommendations, mainly referring to Chrysalis for assistance with housing, the patient misuse of funds, and discontinuing her use of her addiction. Next week, according to the therapist, there will be a meeting-Multidimensional Therapy (MDT) meeting to address further intervention(s) for the patient. This writer questioned Ms. Bray about CHR Respite. Ms. Bray reports that respite is a temporary

The University of Texas at Austin is a world renown school with an acceptance rate of 40.2% as of 2013. Abigail Fisher, a white woman from Texas, sued the University of Texas for racial discrimination in the university’s admission program. Ms. Fisher lost her district court case and the Fifth Circuit Case three to zero; but the Supreme Court accepted her appeal for another trial. Due to Ms. Fisher not being able to attend The University of Texas, she was accepted into Louisiana State University shortly after. At LSU, she filed the lawsuit against the University of Texas to prohibit the university to use race as a factor in the future admission process.

The case was brought to DCFS attention when a reporter stated on 7/11/17, OPWI attempted to obtain an emergency order of protection on behalf of Kiara (age 7). Reportedly Ashley (mother) is actively using METH and also methodone she gets from a clinic, and is also involved in prostitution. Ashley told OPWI that Ashley ''can't wait outside for the bus to go to drug court because she's done bad things to people (robbed people, committed home invasion, taken people's money and drugs) and these people are after her.'' Reporter states that one of these people came to OPWI's house looking for Ashley and scared Kiara. Ashley recently got out of jail, stayed with OPWI for a couple of days, left last Friday telling Kiara she would be back in a couple of hours, didn't return

SSCM Gilmore made an unannounced visit to 304 Merrymont drive Martinez Ga 30907. Carolyn Brown (Bmo) was the only person present at the home. Carolyn reported that she is a stay at home mom, while dad works for Tucker Material at a dispatcher/truck driver. SSCM addressed the allegations that were listed in the report. Bmo denied allegations in the report, and provided information she knew about the bruised eye. Carolyn reported the first black eye resulted from him and Logan were playing, and Logan hit him in the eye. Carolyn, reported on the day of the second black eye. She was in the kitchen cooking. Matthew Jr, was being disrespectful and threating to harm her, and Matthew Sr went to address his behavior in his room. She reported that Matthew

A civil suit is commonly derived from a private party or individual, who alleges damages from duty of care. Once a civil case begins, it is the duty of the plaintiff to prove, with evidence, duty of care, breach of duty, causation, and damages. Conversely, the defendant must prove their affirmative defense against documented allegations. The Oliver versus Brock case proves the importance of supporting evidence as opposed to hearsay statements, to prove the truth of the matter. In the Oliver versus Brock case, Cathy (Plaintiff) filed a lawsuit against Bryan Whitfield Memorial Hospital of Demopolis and the treating physicians Dr. F.S. Whitfield, Dr. Paul Ketcham and Dr. E.C. Brock (Defendant) for negligence of care. Analyzing the facts in

Facts: Abigail Fisher (Plaintiff) is a Caucasian woman that was denied admission to the University of Texas at Austin (UT - Austin) for the fall of 2008. Fisher did not graduate in the top ten percent of her class; therefore, she was not automatically accepted to the University under the Top Ten Percent Plan. Instead, Fisher’s application was evaluated under the Holistic Review Program. The Holistic Review Program evaluates candidates based on their Personal Achievement Index, which looks at: (1) the mean score of candidates’ application essays; and (2) the candidates’ Personal Achievement Score, which is calculated through a holistic review of the applicant’s personal life, activities and leadership, accolades, and mitigates “special circumstances, such as the applicant’s socioeconomic status. . . and race.”

The Cruzan verses Director, Missouri Department of Health was a United States Supreme Court case involving a young adult, Nancy Cruzan that was deemed incompetent. The case caught widespread attention as it was the first case ever heard by the court that discussed how and when families could decide to withdraw nourishment or medical treatment in order to bring about the death of an incompetent family member. (Wold, Judith & Demi, 1991). For 8 years, Nancy Cruzan had been in a vegetative state showing no sign of improvement. After being in the hospital for over a month, Cruzan’s family went to the courts to request the artificial feeding and hydration be terminated so that their daughter could die a dignified

The reporter stated on 12/05/15 the victim was brought to the emergency room and diagnosed with pneumonia. According to the reporter, Braxtyn’s condition is serious but it’s unknown if it’s life threatening. Ms. Donaldson stated South Central is unable to provide Braxtyn with the care he needs so he’s being transported by ground to UMC in Jackson, MS. At this time er doctor’s have expressed concerns about his mother accompanying him to UMC. Per the reporter, Ms. Williams has not been compliant with the medical needs the child is having at this time. The reporter stated Braxtyn requires an oxygen mask but his mother refuses to keep the mask to his face. The reporter stated Essences continues to leave the room and Braxtyn unattended, she’s not

Annie Harper was not allowed to register to vote in Virginia because she wasn’t able to pay the state’s poll tax. Virginia law required voters to pay $1.50 tax to register, with the money collected going to public school funding. Ms. Harper sued the Virginia Board of Elections, claiming the poll tax violated her 14th Amendment right to equal protection. Note: The 24th Amendment to the Constitution already banned poll taxes in federal elections, but not in state elections. The U.S. District Court dismissed Ms. Harper’s suit in favor of the Board of Elections. She then asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

The underlying issues in both cases are racial discrimination. For Cheryl Boulden in the affirmative action case the issue is being “an African American woman among the good ol’ boys in Indiana.” She was recruited because of race and her permanent handicap was seen as an asset for a diversity program lacking any. Yet these qualities made her a target of racism. Susan Finn’s ethnic discrimination presents a dilemma of how to deal with a contract physician’s abusive behavior “toward Hispanics and female staff as well as patients” (Reeves, 2006, p. 79). While the issues of racial and gender discrimination is not unusual, the failure of these agencies to address multiple complaints is.

15). Vickie Sorensen rashly applied a substance down the baby’s throat while Sorensen’s daughter sought an oxygen bottle. The first oxygen bottle was broken consequently Camille Wilcox ran to find another bottle. Sorensen was going to use a suction device, ‘“However, Bleak said, the grandmother stated that the device was too large to accomplish suction on a newborn”’ (Scott, par. 18). In the end, they could not find any equipment to help the struggling baby. The twin’s grandmother, a pediatric nurse, said, “she was shocked by Sorensen’s lack of equipment and preparation and said she believed that, with proper equipment, she could have kept the baby boy alive” (Scott, par. 20). Additionally, Sorensen was seen “using a technique that was 12 years out of date” (Alberty, par. 17). This was reported by a medic after a call was made to 911, and an ambulance arrived to the scene. The baby boy was reported dead once the mother was transported to an actual hospital (Scott). Furthermore, Vickie Sorensen did not have a medical license to practice. The first step in suing a doctor, everyone must take them up against the licensure board; however, Sorensen did not have one. Clearly her actions matched those of an unlicensed nurse. Midwives are a little different since they rely on years of experiences rather than actual medical

If this scenario happened in an outpatient clinic or urgent care center and there were physicians who were more dedicated to patient safety a report to child protective services may have been made regarding the child’s injuries. This child deserves to have her rights observed and

This case is extremely relevant to what is known as the four D’s of negligence; duty, dereliction, direct cause and damages. Duty is when a doctor and a patient have formed a relationship and said doctor has taken on the responsibility of taking care of the patient. Dereliction or failure to perform a duty, there must be some kind of proof that the doctor somehow neglected the doctor neglected the patient. Direct cause, there must be some kind of proof that what happened to the patient was a direct cause of how the doctor conducted himself or his failure to act which resulted in injury. Damages a patient must prove that harm was incurred by the direct result of the physicians actions.