Small Claims Court Case Analysis

small claims jurisdictional requirements of courts. As each state has built a maximum limit of

Plaintiff claims false arrest and malicious prosecution. Plaintiff states he was arrested for criminal possession of marijuana however no marijuana was recovered. PO Hernandez, PO Bonet, and PO Heredia were members of the anti-crime in PSA 6. Officers observed via Viper camera plaintiff and two other apprehended individuals smoking marijuana in the park behind a housing project. Officers approached plaintiff and two individuals and conducted a stop and frisk. Officers did not recover any contraband or marijuana was recovered. Plaintiff and the two individuals were transported to the precinct where a bag of marijuana was recovered during a search at the precinct. Officers could not determine ownership of the marijuana therefore all three were

In the U.S. many people turn to courts’ to help them settle disputes, gain monetary compensation, or seek justice for a crime. Many people only know the basics about courts within the U.S. In the recent case of Shelly Sterling v. Donald Sterling, who was seeking the aid of the court in order to sell the L.A. Clippers to Ballmer. Let’s use this as a primary example through this paper to better understand, who makes up the court? Furthermore, it will be explained what types of cases are received and the process and jurisdiction of appeals within a state.

The federal statute that has an extensive impact on state facilities and programs is Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871. These 1983 law suits can have an enormous impact on the day to day operation of the state and local prisons and jails. These 1983 suits are civil actions and not criminal actions. This means the prisoners can file a civil law suit in a federal court and challenge the conditions in the state and local prisons. These law suits that were filed by inmates claim that the prison official deprived the inmates of their constitutional rights. The inmates argue that they were deprived of adequate medical care, protection against excessive force by other inmates and the correctional officers and the inmates wanted access to

5) Decide whether or not jurisdiction is proper based on purposeful availment in the forum state and whether the court of appeals should appeal or reverse the district’s court ruling.

The present claim is related to an insurance agreement. The trial Court conceded the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction presented by the Defendant, Allstate Insurance Company (Allstate) in an amendment to its answer. James Gross (Gross), the Plaintiff appealed the decision. We are now move to determine whether the Superior Court of Camden County erred in dismissing the Complaint on the basis that the Defendant did not have minimum contacts with the forum, and consequently the Court did not have personal jurisdiction over it. We found that the trial court erred in granting the dismissal of the Complaint based on such grounds. In its decision the trial Court applied the “minimum contacts” test as contemplated in International Shoe

Several courts may have jurisdiction in this case, as this is an issue between a local municipality and local resident. The proper forum for the suit is the Jurisdiction Trial Court, General Jurisdiction court of that state, the Appellate Court and Jurisdiction of Federal State Court. The limited jurisdiction trial court will only hear a case for charges of 5,000 dollars or less, if the amount of charges is more, the case will have to be heard at the General Jurisdiction court of that state. (Cheeseman, 2007. Pg.18). In this court the client would have to show evidence and give testimonies to support his case. Given that these courts are appealable, in the event that the case may be appealed, the decisions made can be handed down to the Intermediate appellate court, specifically the court of appeals (Cheeseman, 2007 pg. 18). The court of appeals will review the trial court records to determine whether there have been any errors at the trial that would require modification or reversal of the trials court decisions. Although the appeals court will review both sides of the trial and will usually grant a brief oral hearing to the parties, however, no more evidence or testimony is permitted. In the event that the client does not agree with the Appellate court’s decision or the state does not have an

Blake Stanton d/b/a Stealth Judgment Recovery visits local county courthouses, investigates public records and civil court dockets, and examines select court awarded small claims money judgments. In conclusion, as a judicial judgment investor, he determines whether or not it is prudent to pursue agreements for assigning the money judgments regarding qualified leads and then carry out supplementary proceedings and negotiate with judgment debtors to facilitate the satisfaction and release of such money decrees.

Say you have a conflict, for example, you have a dispute with someone maybe a contractor. How are you going to resolve it? You can consider taking the matter to a small claim court. Once you take the matter to a small claim court a judge will listen to the evidence and make a decision based on the facts and proof presented by both sides. A small claim court is a cheaper and faster method. You can find small claim forms online. State forms are located on the State Court web site, local forms are included on a local forms page.

This paper will include material about state and federal court systems. Terms such as subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction will be described in detail. There are requirements of personal jurisdiction in a federal court and three different types of personal jurisdiction. The two types of cases that federal courts may hear are criminal cases and civil cases which will also be discussed.

The second case Plata v. Davis the State a California realized that nothing has changed to better the medical care for prisoners that are staying in one of the thirty-three prisons in California (Specter, 2010). Both of these cases take a look at how the medical needs of prisoners are being neglected that results in injury and death (Specter, 2010). The reasoning for such neglect for the health of inmates comes down to the problem of overcrowding; severe overcrowding makes it impossible to keep a prison safe (Specter, 2010). The two California court cases were combined into one case Plata v. Schwarzenegger when taken to a three-judge court (Griffin III et al., 2013).

Your question is complicated to have a solution. That’s why courts’ standards for child custody have change throughout history. I think it’s fundamental for a child to be raised by both parents because each parent is unique and they transmit different qualities to their child. It is possible for a single parent to raise a child but it is going to be more complicated. By having both parents it just makes the process to raise a child easier.

This paper discusses these differences as well as an important concern for Nevadans, the value of an intermediate court of appeals. In the latter we will note the attempts to establish a court of appeals as well where the issue stands now.

In the typical state court system has several levels on complexity. The trials that take place in this setting are typically limited jurisdiction. This court system is the state’s highest court system. All court-associated cases within the state are leveled into the state court system. All state courts have varying jurisdiction. In these minimal crime cases, the judge, rarely a jury, does the ruling on these trials. Preliminary beginnings, such as arraignments, bail hearings, and preliminary hearings, happen in state courts as well. There are problem-solving courts that help to resolve the case before it is taken to trial. Some examples of these courts would be, drugs, guns, juvenile, domestic, and mental health courts. The states highest

Reasoning: Determining jurisdiction is critical because jurisdiction not only allows the party to know whether that court is entitled to adjudicate a dispute, but it can also help determine which laws are applicable, which can make a difference in a party's recovery. For example, Georgia and Delaware might have different laws regarding damages so that Elle may have an advantage in one court as compared to another court. In order for a court to be able to exercise jurisdiction, the court must have some connection to either the parties or to the event in question. Therefore, the possibilities for jurisdiction include: the district court for the state of Georgia, the district court for the state of Delaware, or one of the state courts for either Georgia or Delaware. In order for federal jurisdiction to apply, the circumstances of the case must meet the requirements for diversity jurisdiction. Diversity jurisdiction refers to that federal court jurisdiction involved when the parties involved are from two