Constitutionality of a New Ordinance

1. The issue, in this case, is that the requirement of citizenship to have workers with undivided loyalty was defended by the New City council as a result of which new ordinance was passed. In this regard, Mark Sheehan (a US resident) has sued the council regarding the new ordinance’s constitutionality.

As a citizen of the United States, reforming the constitutionality of the new ordinance can be possible by the New City as Mark Sheehan holds every right of undivided loyalty by implying what needs to be done. Being a Native America, he also holds a legitimate right to do so (Bessette & Pitney, 2013, p. 127).

The US Constitution directly implies that the local government does not have any right to invoke them in any case. In this case, a local government is viewed as the Public Transportation Board of the city who passed the new ordinance. They are identified as the actors who actually do not hold any right to go against the constitution (New City). Suing the New City by Mark rather than the Public Transportation Board can be effective because he directly can take legal actions on the constitutionality of the new order rather than upon the local government actors. In addition, a stated criterion of the new ordinance highlights that rights can only be exercised by the US citizens and not any other immigrants, which is also fulfilled in the case of Mark.

Thus, it can be concluded that Mark Sheehan action of suing the New City regarding the constitutionality of the new ordinance will be accepted by the New City Constitution. Moreover, it is likely that the respected authority will consider reforming the new ordinance as decided in the court of judgment (Garrett, 2018, p. 5).

2. In this case, the issue is that a Minister has been wrongly accused by the local entertainment newspaper and the picture displayed portrayed as if he was taking an exit from an adult bookstore. 

The Minister being falsely accused of exiting from an adult bookstore has every right to sue the newspaper publisher or the company as this scenario can be considered as ‘libel’. This is because fake information has led down his public image and reputation. It is most possible for the Minister to win this case on a legal basis (Cited in Klein & Wueller, 2017).

Focusing on a legal basis, the Minister has every right to sue and he can also win this libel and defamation case. To win this case, he must give the evidence about proving his innocence. He must also provide the newspaper and the section where his image was printed and prove that it displayed false information. As a plaintiff, the Minister must also be able to highlight that the newspaper published an unprivileged and concerning statement. He must also be able to show the negligence act of publishing fake information as well as damage experienced on his reputation and public image (Avinandan, 2006, p. 228).

Libel and Defamation against a Minister

Following this legal approach as a citizen and not as a Minister can also be won in this libel case by adhering and providing legal evidence and other aspects that might be required to prove that he was not exiting the adult bookstore.

3. In this case, the parents of 12-year-old boy sue a person for his wrongful death that dies drowning himself due to cardiac arrest.

From a legal perspective, a person can only pay or face the adverse consequences when sued by a parent or a family member of the dead person when the former has an interest or any benefit from this incident. People with the benefits of death need to be paid for the damages caused or suffer adverse consequences on the basis of a legal perspective. However, in the case of a 12-year-boy, his death due to cardiac arrest has not benefited the accused person in any form (Justia, 2018).

There is also the presence of negligence law which is imposed when the carelessness of a person causes the death of another person (HG, 2018). If the sued person had received any interest from the death of a 12-year-old boy, then on the basis of this law, he would have faced consequences and had to compensate all the damages caused by the death of the 12-year-old boy. But in this case, the person did not experience any benefit and he had his own reasons for not helping the boy come out of the water i.e. being late in the office.

The above discussion shows that the man walking by the 12-year-old boy was never a reason for the latter’s death from the legal perspective. Hence, the filed case can be dismissed by the court.

4. John as a former employee of Northeast Airlines, Inc. has filed a lawsuit against the company for being discriminated for which he now wants a monetary compensation of $100,000 under the Federal Anti-Discrimination Act.

In every case, whether it may be a criminal or a civil case, the Federal Court of Texas has their own legal approach on the basis of the case type. Based on Article 5 and Section 1, the court has every right to jurisdiction.

The Federal Court of Texas has further stated that jurisdiction can only be exercised when a party files a lawsuit against the other for their actions. The responsible offender or the person who committed certain harmful actions to the other party is imposed with a varying range of penalties to be ruled by the court. An offender has to perform different prescribed activities of the community as penalized by the court. Apart from this, a lawsuit filed upon the other business partner or another party for causing damage or financial loss in the business of a company is expected to go through a process of jurisdiction by the Federal Court of Texas (TX Courts, 2014, p. 18). 

Breach of Contract

There are other criteria as well that must be met in a certain type of criminal or civil cases and one of them is based on the charges or loss caused by a person upon the company due to his/her actions. In this regard, a person who committed these actions must be filed with a lawsuit by the company for a certain amount. This is observed in the current scenario where John (a previous employee of a company named Northeast Airlines, Inc.) who is also an occupant of Texas, has brought a lawsuit. This lawsuit has been filed in the Federal Court of Texas, which is against Northeast Airlines, Inc., regarding the Federal Anti-Discrimination Act. He has been seeking monetary damage of $100,000 According to TX Courts (2013, p. 2), on a case which involves monetary charges to be paid by the offender, the Federal Court of Texas only undertake cases which do not exceed a monetary value to be compensated or to be received by a party of maximum $10,000 (TX Courts, 2013, p. 2).

As it is observed that this case involves a monetary compensation amounting to a total of $100,000, which is more than $10,000 for the damage caused, the Federal Court of Texas dismisses this case.

5. An aunt of the soldier suggests him to move near her area. She also tells that there are many jobs available in it but, when the soldier arrives, she tells that she is unable to put up with him. 

A breach of contract is basically considered when an agreement between the two parties is obligated by the action of one of the party. During this case, the other party who is harmed can make several claims if a loss or damage is experienced by them (Gottesman, & Brickley, 2014).

Similar to it, an agreement was made between the two parties which are further identified under the above scenario is the soldier who has just been discharged from his work and his aunt who is living on the countryside. Ignoring and rejecting the contract of his aunt on asking him to live with her, she succeeds in convincing the soldier to agree under the stated conditions. The stated condition under this case is identified as assurance of the aunt about plenty of work available within her area. Being convinced by the terms stated by his aunt, the soldier agrees to think over and decide upon this agreement. Thinking over for several days, the soldier agrees to the terms and conditions state under the contract between him and his aunt. This decision being identified by both parties, the soldier moves to the state where his aunt lives. Reaching his aunt’s place for the time being to work, his aunt further disagrees under the stated terms and condition of her contract with the soldier. She further stated that she is not able to put it up with him.

Wrongful Death

Thus, it is understood that the soldier’s aunt breached the contract between her and the soldier after the agreement was made. Moreover, the soldier facing a loss of financial expense and his valuable time, on the basis of the contract, his aunt needs to compensate in monetary terms for the soldier’s traveling and other expenses such as food (WUSTL, 2003, p. 1).

6. After being arrested for committing a crime of switching the identification records of the newborn baby under the Infant Protection and Baby Switching Prevention Act, Susan still seeks to prevail against the Congress.

On the basis of the above scenario, it is assumed that Susan being indicted for the reason of her violation of the Infant Protection and Baby Switching Prevention Act, she has lesser chances of winning through the power against the Congress.

Focusing on the Infant Protection and Baby Switching Prevention Act, there are various legal norms upon every individual from taking certain actions that are completely banned under this act. Any individual performing or committing the stated actions are served with legal punishments under the stated act. One of these prohibited actions is identified as an act of switching over the babies especially new infant under the Section 1205 Article of the Infant Protection and Baby Switching Prevention Act. In this regard, baby switching activity means an individual switching the identification or destroying the records of the new babies. Any person committing this criminal activity is legally imposed for paying compensation of $250,000 under the legal terms. Up to a maximum of $500,000 is charged on the basis of the damages or the intentions of the crime (NCBI, 2014; Cited in Congress, 2015).

Through an understanding of this act, Susan is not bound to prevail or experience any power against the Congress because she has switched the record of the new infant baby and has taken actions that are against the law. Being arrested for her actions, Susan will also be imposed with compensation of maximum $500,000 and a minimum of $250,000. This will be based upon the understanding whether her act was intentional or not. If not, then evidence must be provided through which she can prove the innocence of her actions (NCBI, 2014; Congress, 2015).

References

Avinandan, P. (2006). Protecting the media’s first amendment rights in Florida: Making false light plaintiffs play by defamation rules. Law Review, 1-24.

Bessette, J. M., & Pitney, J. J. (2013). American government and politics: Deliberation, democracy and citizenship. USA: Cengage Learning.

Congress. (2015). In the house of representatives. Retrieved December 19, 2018, from https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/42/text

Garrett, B. L. (2018). Local evidence in constitutional interpretation. University of Virginia School of Law, 1-37.

Gottesman, B. M., & Brickley, S. D. (2014). Breach of contract and defenses to contract and excuses for breach. Business Law Basics, 1-5.

(2018). Wrongful death law. Retrieved December 19, 2018, from https://www.hg.org/wrongful-death.html

Justia. (2018). Wrongful death. Retrieved December 19, 2018, from https://www.justia.com/injury/wrongful-death/

Klein, D. O. & Wueller, J. R. (2017). Fake news: A Legal perspective. Retrieved December 19, 2018, from https://www.kleinmoynihan.com/fake-news-a-legal-perspective/

NCBI. (2014). Child abuse and neglect policy. Retrieved December 19, 2018, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK195993/

TX Courts. (2013). Texas courts: A descriptive summary. Retrieved December 19, 2018, from https://www.txcourts.gov/media/10753/court-overview.pdf

TX Courts. (2014). The Texas judicial system. Retrieved December 19, 2018, from https://www.txcourts.gov/media/675444/The-Texas-Judicial-System_Print102714.pdf

WUSTL. (2003). Remedies for breach of contract. Contracts Greenfield Fall 2003