The United States Legal System

Imagine you are the director of health information services for a medium-sized health care facility. Like many of your peers, you have contracted with an outside copying service to handle all requests for release of patient health information at your facility. You have learned that a lobbying organization for trial attorneys in your state is promoting legislation to place a cap on photocopying costs, which is significantly below the actual costs incurred as part of the contract. (Case Study, p. 20)

The complexity of the United States legal system reflects the diversity of the public it serves. Over centuries of immigration different cultures have brought old world legal customs that eventually intermixed to become the legal system under which the country now operates. While much of the influence in Law can be credited to the British Common Law system there are some defining characteristics, which are uniquely American. One of these is public prosecution, which originated in 1704 in Connecticut and was later adopted by the other colonies and, after the Revolution, the States. (Jacoby 3) These practices lead to the development of district attorneys, though this was not their original title. A district attorney is the criminal

The second accident at the "Timken Steel Faircrest plant" company which a is an employee fall down more than 40 feet which led to several broken bones because of just a small mistake. The problem is when he made a maintenance on a crane he wasn't ware Certified safety harness which it could safe his live from the risk. I used to do a maintenance on more than one cran and my company doesn't allow me to go without waring a Certified safety harness because they have to keep all the employees a way from all the risk and even if they didn't told me to ware it, I will not go up to the cran without it, do the fact that no one knows what will happen and even if I am good at this job, I have to work safely. I agree that this company should teach all

The courts play a huge role in the criminal justice system. The dual court system of the United States (U.S.) was established through the U.S. constitution. The court systems have a multiple purposes and elements of court. Federal and state court system is what makes up the dual court system of the U.S. Today the U.S. court system is what it is today because of previous legal codes, common law, and the precedent it played in the past. Making the U.S. court system a vital role in the criminal justice system..

Courts are established social, political, and judicial institutions necessary for the manifestation of justice and the maintenance of law and order. The courts are part of the judicial branch of government, as outlined in Article III of the United States Constitution. Courts are the arenas in which the law is tried and applied. Judges are the presiding officers of the court. The United States Supreme Court is the most fundamental court because has "the authority to decide the constitutionality of federal laws and resolve other disputes over them," (United States Courts, 2012). This is true even though even though the court does not expressly enforce that law; enforcement is the province of the executive branch.

In what ways is the indigenous justice paradigm in conflict with the principles of the traditional, adversarial American criminal justice system? In what ways do the principles of Native American justice complement more mainstream correctional initiatives?

“The court finds you guilty on all accounts. You are sentenced to 35 years in federal prison. Court dismissed.” If only justice in America was the same as a hollywood movie, where, in the end, each and every person put on trial receives a true and just verdict. It would be nice if America’s justice system was designed so that “you couldn’t be the next victim of corruption - innocent and sent to prison, or strapped to a table and put to death; or robbed of your life savings by American lawyers” (Sachs, America’s Corrupt Legal). Welcome to the new America, where all it takes is pockets as deep as the Pacific Ocean to be innocent and poverty to be found guilty, thrown in jail, and not given a second thought. Although America often prides itself on its just ways of governing and dealing with potential criminals, the justice system is often corrupted because of social issues, ethical issues, corrupt officials, and control of the press.

During the early course of American history, the role of the Supreme Court was never a

The federal and state judicial systems are alike and different in numerous of ways. The federal and state judicial system have a difference in some of the laws and court system. There diference are in the jurisdiction and is mostly defined by the kind of cases that take place within the courtroom. State court consists of mainly what we consider as minor criminal activity such as traffic violations, family hearing and disputes, law suits, and robberies most of these are called misdemeanors. Lawsuits verses the United States is not allowed to be heared by the state courts that have certain laws established such as “criminal, antitrust, bankruptcy, patent, copyright, and some maritime cases” (Reuters, 2016). Federal court do not hear as many cases as the state do whereas it has to be listed in the Constitution and provided by Congress. “Federal court can only hear cases that’s within the United States party, conflict of the United States Constitution, citizens cases that so not exceed $75,000, and last but not least bankruptcy, copyright, and patent cases” (Neubauer, 2014). The state and federal courts are established differently whereas the state is established by a state that is within the city or the country and the federal is established under the United States Constitution to better resolve conflict.

Tang filed a two-count complaint for negligence and vicarious liability against Hipster, for injuries sustained during the evacuation of Airline Boeing 737 aircraft on February 1, 2015, in San Diego, California. Tang’s Complaint is deficient on its face and presents no potentially viable claims for relief against Hipster; nor does the complaint meet the pleading requirements under Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). This Court should dismiss Tang’s complaint with prejudice.

Many years ago the federal court system was started (Siegel, Schmalleger & Worrall 2014). We should take a recorded voyage back so as to figure out how the government court system started. Numerous years prior, state courts heard legitimate issues of its natives. The United States Court framework is a covering system of various courts which can, at first look, appear to be puzzling. In any case, a more critical look uncovers a generally basic example to the way courts is organized. Each state and government court framework is partitioned into a few layers, as portrayed underneath. The state courts comprehended that as the country developed; there may be a requirement for more courts. To represent this, the Constitution gave Congress the ability

The United States court system is the institution were all the legal disputes in the american society are carryed out and resolved. However, one single court is not enough to resolve every single dispute in society and that is why the court system is made up of two different courts, the federal courts and the state courts. Moreover, the federal and state courts are made up of several divisions made to handle legal disputes differently depending on its seriousness. For example, the state court is made up of trial courts of limited jurisdiction and probate courts were cases and disputes originate and then move up to trial courts of general jurisdiction, intermediate apellate courts, and courts of last resort respectively depending on the case.In contrast, the federal court consists of district courts, territorial coutrs, tax court, court of international trade, claims court, court of veterans appeals, an courts of military review which then move on to courts of appeals respectively and may ultimately end up in the United States supreme court. In addition, cases from state court may also appeal into the federal court system but not the other way around.

There are three women on the Supreme Court, one of whom is Latina, and there is one black justice serving on the Supreme Court (Brown, 2016). This is a major issue. The United States, the “melting pot”, has an extreme lack of diversity in their court system. This is an issue that affects several aspects of society. Decisions made by judges will affect the lives of men, women, and their families. The decisions made by judges can also create law. Unlike political officials, the people do not always have the power to vote judges into their positions. Instead, the people hope that their peers with the power to affect the system choose a candidate that will fight for them. Often times, this does not happen.

Torts of negligence are breaches of duty that results to injury to another person to whom the duty breached is owed. Like all other torts, the requirements for this are duty, breach of duty by the defendant, causation and injury(Stuhmcke and Corporation.E 2001). However, this form of tort differs from intentional tort as regards the manner the duty is breached. In torts of negligence, duties are breached by negligence and not by intent. Negligence is conduct that falls below the standard of care established by law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm(Stuhmcke and Corporation.E 2001). The standard measure of negligence is the universal reasonable person standard. The assumption in this case is that a reasonable

The court determines a person is negligent when they fail to comply with their duty and when their conduct falls below the standard of care. The standard of care in negligence is established by the law to protect others against the unreasonable risk of harm. The risk must be foreseeable. Pennsylvania courts determine a party’s standard of care by examining what a reasonable person would do under similar circumstances. A reasonable person would also consider industry standards, historical information, and other guiding information when making decisions. This will allow the party to be on “notice”. With regarding notice, the question that should be asked is “do the facts, circumstances, or history inform you of potential harm.”. One way to determine whether or not someone is a reasonably prudent person is to use a formula—Burden < Probability * Injury. The formula is designed to weigh out the Burden of adequate precautions against the probability of the action occurring and the gravity of the resulting injury. If the Probability of the Injury of the injury and the level of the injury is higher than the Burden, then the party will be found negligent.