The Criminal justice process from arrest to just before the trial

/in /by

Use complete sentences to respond to each of the following questions: What are the types of criminal law in the United States? Explain. Select one part of the criminal justice process from arrest to just before the trial. Why is this part of the process important? Explain.
What are the purposes of criminal punishment in the United States? Explain.
Is it possible for people convicted of crimes to correct their behavior in the corrections system? Explain.
Part Two: Now, you be a state trial judge. Read the scenario in the lesson, and then answer the question that follows.

Question: What sentence would you give the defendant for this crime? Explain in at least one complete paragraph, using information from the lesson and the scenario above.

The Types of criminal law in the United States

/in /by

Part One: Use complete sentences to respond to each of the following questions:  What are the types of criminal law in the United States?

Explain.
Select one part of the criminal justice process from arrest to just before the trial. Why is this part of the process important? Explain.
What are the purposes of criminal punishment in the United States? Explain.
Is it possible for people convicted of crimes to correct their behavior in the corrections system? Explain.

Acme General Hospital 

/in /by

Final Project Hypothetical: Acme General Hospital Acme General Hospital is a large referral hospital in Boston, Massachusetts. It has a full set of
services including a trauma center, surgical subspecialties, internal medicine, cardiac,
neurology, gastroenterology, otolaryngology, obstetrics and gynecology, dermatology,
rheumatology, and pediatrics. Acme General Hospital is a teaching hospital, providing high-end
tertiary and quaternary care and is a safety net provider.

Acme is part of the Vision in Health System which includes five community hospitals, a skilled
nursing facility (SFN), a rehabilitation hospital, a home health agency, ten surgery centers, and
five ambulatory facilities.

Costs associated with running Acme are going up and reimbursement rates are falling,
especially from government payers. In order to compete in this environment, Acme believes it
needs to grow its business in order to consolidate its clinical, as well as administrative, services.
It believes obtaining efficiencies of scale as a strategy is imperative for its future.

Acme learns that Blakely General, a community hospital in the Springfield, Massachusetts, area
has retained an investment banking company to review its options for staying independent or
joining a health system. The firm representing Blakely General is First Omega Corporation,
which is a division of a public company incorporated in the state of Delaware, having a principal
place of business on Park Avenue in New York City.

Blakely General’s primary source of business comes from referrals from a large physician-
owned practice in the greater Springfield area called Apex Med. Apex Med has 1,500 physicians
in its group, including primary care and sub-specialist physicians. Blakely and Apex Med have
had a long-standing relationship which is embodied in a Preferred Provider Arrangement
whereby Apex Med sends its referrals to Blakely for patients requiring services it cannot provide
and Blakely agrees to give Apex Med “preferred status” among the other providers who refer
patients to Blakely. This “preferred status” is important to Apex Med because it can assure its
patients of placement at a hospital when the need arises and it includes the assurance from
Blakely that it will not attempt to poach the patient and instead will communicate with the
referring physician throughout the patient’s stay at Blakely and then once discharged, the
patient will be returned to the referring physician.

Apex Med has one major competitor, Cerv Med, also a physician-owned practice. For the last
five years, Apex and Cerv have had an oral agreement they called the “employee allocation
arrangement.” Under this arrangement, Apex and Cerv agreed not to hire each other’s key
executive and physician employees. Unbeknownst to Apex Med, a former administrator, Lenora
Davidson, reported the “employee allocation agreement” to the Department of Justice (the
DOJ). The DOJ, initiated an investigation. It is days away from filing an antitrust action against
these two medical practice companies for violations of the Sherman Act.

Drummond is a large public company headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri, that, among other
things, buys physician organizations. Acquired physician organizations are combined with other
owned physician groups to achieve efficiencies of scale, including clinical protocols and
acquisition of equipment and pharmaceuticals. Drummond has been in discussions with Apex

 

 

Med in an effort to acquire them and bring them into the Drummond division which houses
medical practices.

Drummond makes an offer to purchase Apex Med for $50 million. Under the arrangement Apex
Med physicians, nurses, and administrators would become employed by Drummond. The
transaction is a purchase of all the membership interests in Apex Med LLC. The parties enter
into negotiations, draft a definitive agreement, receive all the necessary regulatory approvals,
and close the transaction. All of Apex Med employees become employed by Drummond.

Just as Drummond acquires Apex Med, Acme and Blakeley execute a bilateral standard form
Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) and further agrees to a 90-day standstill agreement, wherein
Blakeley agrees not to solicit or respond to other parties’ interest in a corporate transaction with
them and Acme agrees to devote its energies in doing all things necessary to effect a potential
acquisition of Blakeley.

A memorandum of understanding (MOU) is negotiated and executed by Acme and Blakeley
pursuant to which Acme would purchase Blakeley for $450 million. First Omega Corp. is acting
in a consulting capacity through its Managing Director, Sami King as Blakeley’s investment
banker. The transaction is contingent upon the usual steps including obtaining Board and
regulatory approvals and due diligence.

Not being happy with the huge commission he will earn if the transaction is completed, King
contacts a competitor of Acme, AllHealth, a large hospital system in Connecticut. He tells the
Chief Financial Officer of AllHealth that Acme is going to buy Blakeley and expand its catchment
area into Connecticut, potentially becoming a major competitor to AllHealth. The CFO of
AllHealth is alarmed, gathers the executive committee of the Board of Directors and proposes
that they approve a better offer for Blakeley. After a discussion, AllHealth outbids Acme with an
offer to buy Blakeley for $500 million. King calculates his increased sales commission and
advises Blakeley’s Board of Directors to take the AllHealth offer. When several Board members
question King about the fact that Blakeley already has an agreement with Acme, he tells them,
in a forceful way, that they have a fiduciary duty to sell themselves to the highest bidder. He
says that duty is more important than the MOU or the stand-still agreement. Raj Patel, the
President of AllHealth is invited into the Board meeting with the Board of Blakeley. He tells the
Blakeley Board that Acme is a third-rate hospital with substantial financial problems and a track
record of routinely committing medical malpractice. The Blakeley Board accepts the AllHealth
offer but says it will do so only if AllHealth waives due diligence, all contingencies including a
financing contingency, and accepts all current and future liabilities, whether known, unknown,
threatened or implied.

After acquiring Apex Med, Drummond decides that its physicians should no longer refer cases
to Blakeley and instead it should send all of its business to Acme. Acme accepts the patient
referrals under a participation agreement whereby Acme provides Drummond lower in-patient,
surgery and procedures rates than it charges others.

Drs. Alana Kode and Jorge Mecenas were physicians who worked at Apex Med who were in
turn working for Drummond. They did not agree with Drummond’s decision to stop referring
cases to Blakeley and their insistence on referring them all to Acme. Drs. Kode and Mecenas
had good relationships with the physicians at Blakeley and did not want to upend those good
working relations. Each doctor, Kode and Mecenas, had employment agreements with Apex
Med, which were assumed by Drummond. In the employment agreement, each physician

 

 

agreed to work for a period of five years for Apex Med. In return for the agreement to work for
no less than five years, Apex Med agreed to pay off the costs of each physician’s medical
education loans. At the time of their resignation from Drummond, Drs. Kode and Mecenas had
worked for Apex Med for two years.

 

The fact pattern contains seven potential lawsuits related to topics covered in this course.

Write responses to the questions below. Include all relevant factual information from the hypothetical in your response. In this process, be creative with the foundations in the common law and in statutory regulations to assert, deny, and/or defend claims each party may make against another. Assume that any claims made by one party against others are not settle-able and that the claimant is left with no alternative but to file suit.

1. List all the potential lawsuits within this fact pattern. Consider the potential of multiple parties suing other parties in your answer.

2. Provide the following information for each potential lawsuit that may arise from the facts of the hypothetical. Make sure your answer includes the following:

    1. Name the plaintiff(s)and the defendant(s).
    2. Indicate the foundation of the suit, i.e., contract, tort, crime, or statutory regulation
    3. Detail the allegations of wrongdoing that each plaintiff avers.
    4. State the response and defense each defendant would assert.
    5. Indicate which laws are specifically implicated, for example:
      1. Stark
      2. Fraud, waste, and abuse
      3. False claims
      4. HIPAA
      5. EMTALA
      6. Antitrust
    6. Suggest what types of damages will be alleged for each suit.

3. Explain how you think each case would be resolved by a court.

    1. Indicate who you believe wins the lawsuit.
    2. State what types of damages, if any, you think may be awarded, and how might the court calculate them.

4. Describe any ethical issues which may not rise to the level of an actionable lawsuit

The crime of aggravated battery

/in /by

An intruder broke into Gregory Mason’s home at 3:00 am on March 15, 2020, with the intent to steal his expensive and rare coin collection. Asleep upstairs when he heard the noises in the middle of the night, Gregory, armed with a baseball bat, proceeded to beat the intruder nearly to death. He was charged with the crime of aggravated battery and is awaiting trial.

Gregory is considering what options, if any, he has as a defense to the crime. If you are Gregory’s defense lawyer, what type of defense would you suggest and why?

The Law offices of Barney Fife

/in /by

Plaintiff Fred Jones (Jones) arrives at the law offices of Barney Fife where you work as a paralegal Jones says he slipped and fell on a sidewalk in front of his Los Angeles City apartment house
• Jones hurt his right knee which was bleeding profusely.
He went to the hospital where they did an X-ray and MRI
scan and determined the kneecap to have a slight fracture
on the patella (the bone covering the knee joint). Jones
paid for his medical care using his own health insurance
• Jones is in a cast and still exhibiting scrapes on his hands
and face from his impact with the sidewalk

 

Jones wants to hire attorney Barney Fife to represent him
• You talk the case over with your boss Barney, who tells you to sign up Jones as a client and to draft two letters for Barney’s signature. In the first letter, Barney will demand money, an agreement to fix the sidewalk, and a public apology from the City of the Los Angeles

• In the second letter, Barney will demand that the apartment house owner also pay for Jones injuries
• Lastly, Barney tells you to state in the two letters that if the City or apartment house owner do not agree to Barney’s demands, he will hold a press conference at which he will denounce both the City and the apartment house owner for almost killing Jones through their actions.

 

Question 1: What additional things should you have asked client Jones about during your first interview with him, prior to his being signed up as a client? Why?
• Question 2: What additional steps might you take to prepare the case now that Jones is a client? Why?
• Question 3: What concerns if any would you express to Barney over his demand letters before they go out? Why?
• Question 4: If the defendant tries to stop the press conference by trying to get an injunction as part of its defamation cross-complaint, what Motion can you file to stop this cross-complaint and why might it succeed?

 

Government discrimination on the basis of age

/in /by

The Charter specifically prohibits government discrimination on the basis of age, yet there are laws against drinking, driving, and voting that clearly discriminate against young people.

a. Under what section of the Charter is this infringement saved?

b. Is this discrimination justifiable in your opinion?

Intro to South African Law

/in /by

Intro to South African Law. It has been said that our court system generally suffers from the inability to provide many citizens with appropriate access to courts as litigation is not only expensive, but also time consuming and often lengthy. Your client is seeking a divorce and the parties does not yet have a solution as to the maintenance to be paid, the custody of their children and various similar issues.

Discuss the other forms of dispute resolution, and their differences, which are seen as being faster, more effective, less cumbersome and less expensive and usually also a less conflicting way of resolving disputes and problems. Conclude with advising your client

as to the best option to use in the particular circumstances

Current West Virginia Law regarding involuntary commitment

/in /by

After reading Chapter 4, read Stowers v. Wolodzko, 386 Mich. 119, 191 N.W. 2d 355 (1971). In a two-page document address the following: Give a summary of the facts and issues in the case; Compare this case to current West Virginia Law regarding involuntary commitment and explain how you believe this case would be handled today – how would it be different from 1971? What additional information would be helpful in this case? Do you agree or disagree with the holding in this case? Why? (100 points) See Handout for suggested case analysis framework.

 

False Imprisonment
False imprisonment arises from unlawful restriction of a person’s freedom. Many false imprisonment cases involve patients who have been involuntarily committed to a mental hospital. In Stowers v. Wolodzko, a psychiatrist was held liable for his treatment of a patient who had been forcibly committed against
her will.47 Although this type of commitment was allowed under state law, for many days the psychiatrist held the woman incommunicado and prevented her from calling an attorney or a relative. His actions amounted to false imprisonment because her freedom was unlawfully restrained. (The unusual facts of this case are laid out in The Court Decides at the end of this chapter.)

 

Stowers v. Wolodzko
386 Mich. 119, 191 N.W.2d 355 (1971)
Swainson, J.
[In court opinions, a jurist’s position is often given by the addition of “J” or “CJ” behind the name. The initials stand for Judge or Justice, or Chief Judge or Chief Justice, depending on the title of the position in the particular jurisdiction. Members of the Michigan Supreme Court are known as justices, thus the Stowers decision was written by Justice Swainson.] This case presents complicated issues concerning the liability of a doctor for actions taken subsequent to a person’s confinement in a private mental hospital pursuant to a valid court order. . . . Plaintiff, a housewife, resided in Livonia, Michigan, with her husband and children. She and her husband had been experiencing a great deal of marital difficulties and she testified that she had informed her husband . . . that she intended to file for a divorce. On December 6, 1963, defendant appeared at plaintiff’s home and introduced himself as “Dr. Wolodzko.” Dr. Wolodzko had
never met either plaintiff or her husband before he came to the house. He stated that he had been called by the husband, who had asked him to examine plaintiff. Plaintiff testified that defendant told her that he was there to ask about her husband’s back. She testified that she told him to ask her husband, and that she had no further conversation with him or her husband. She testified that he never told her that he was a psychiatrist. Dr. Wolodzko stated in his deposition . . . that he told plaintiff he was there to examine her.

However, upon being questioned upon this point, he stated that he could “not specifically” recollect having told plaintiff that he was there to examine her. He stated in his deposition that he was sure that the fact he was a psychiatrist would have come out, but that he couldn’t remember if he had told plaintiff that he was a psychiatrist. Plaintiff subsequently spoke to Dr. Wolodzko at the suggestion of a Livonia policewoman, following a domestic quarrel with her husband. He did inform her at that time that he was a psychiatrist.
On December 30, 1963, defendant Wolodzko and Dr. Anthony Smyk, apparently at the request of plaintiff’s husband and without the authorization, knowledge, or consent of plaintiff, signed a sworn statement certi-
fying that they had examined plaintiff and found her to be mentally ill. Such certificate was filed with the Wayne County Probate Court on January 3, 1964, and on the same date an order was entered by the probate court for the temporary hospitalization of plaintiff until a sanity hearing could be held. The Judge ordered plaintiff committed to Ardmore Acres, a privately operated institution, pursuant to the provisions of [Michigan law]. Plaintiff was transported to Ardmore Acres on January 4, 1964. . . . The parties are in substantial agree ment as to what occurred at Ardmore Acres. Defendant requested permission to treat the plaintiff on several different occasions, and she refused. For six days, she was placed in the “security room,” which was a bare room except for the bed.

The windows of the room were covered with wire mesh. During five of the six days, plaintiff refused to eat, and at all times refused medication. Defendant telephoned orders to the hospital and prescribed certain medication. He visited her often during her stay.
When plaintiff arrived at the hospital she was refused permission to receive or place telephone calls, or to receive or write letters. Dr. Wolodzko conceded at the trial that plaintiff wished to contact her brother in
Texas by telephone and that he forbade her to do so. After nine days, she was allowed to call her family, but no one else. Plaintiff testified on direct examination that once during her hospitalization she asked one of her children to call her relatives in Texas and that defendant took her to her room and told her, “Mrs. Stowers, don’t try that again. If you do, you will never see your children again.” It is undisputed that plaintiff repeatedly requested permission to call an attorney and that Dr. Wolodzko refused such permission.
At one point when plaintiff refused medication, on the written orders of defendant, she was held by three nurses and an attendant and was forcibly injected with the medication. Hospital personnel testified at the
trial that the orders concerning medication and deprivation of communication were pursuant to defendant’s instructions. Plaintiff, by chance, found an unlocked telephone near the end of her hospitalization and made a call to her relatives in Texas. She was released by court order on January 27,
1964. Plaintiff filed suit alleging false imprisonment, assault and battery, and malpractice, against defendant Wolodzko, Anthony Smyk and Ardmore Acres. Defendants Ardmore Acres and Smyk were dismissed prior to trial. At the close of plaintiff’s proofs, defendant moved for a directed verdict. The
court granted the motion as to the count of malpractice only, but allowed the counts of assault and battery and false imprisonment to go to the jury. At the Conclusion of the trial, the jury returned a verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $40,000. . . . Defendant has raised five issues on appeal. . . .

. . .
The second issue involves whether or not there was evidence from which a jury could find false imprisonment. “False imprisonment is the unlawful restraint of an individual’s personal liberty or
freedom of locomotion.” [Citation omitted.] It is clear that plaintiff was restrained against her will. Defendant, however, contends that because the detention was pursuant to court order (and hence not unlawful), there can be no liability for false imprisonment. However, defendant was not found liable for admitting or keeping plaintiff in Ardmore Acres. His liability stems from the fact that after plaintiff was taken to Ardmore Acres, defendant held her incommunicado and prevented her from attempting to obtain her release, pursuant to law. Holding a person incommunicado is clearly a restraint of one’s freedom, sufficient to allow a jury to find false imprisonment. Defendant contends that it was proper for
him to restrict plaintiff’s communication with the outside world.

Defendant’s witness, Dr. Sidney
Bolter, testified that orders restricting communications and visitors are customary in cases of this type. Hence, defendant contends these orders were lawful and could not constitute the basis for an action of false imprisonment. However, the testimony of Dr. Bolter is not conclusive on this point. . . . Psychiatrists have a great deal of power over their patients. In the case of a person confined to an institution, this power is virtually unlimited. All professions (including the legal profession) contain unscrupulous individuals who use their position to injure others.

The law must provide protection against the torts committed by these individuals. In the case of mental patients, in order to have this protection, they must be able to communicate with the outside world.

In our country, even a person who has committed the most abominable crime has the right to consult with an attorney. Our Court and the courts of our sister States have recognized that interference with attempts of persons incarcerated to obtain their freedom may constitute false imprisonment. Further, we have jealously protected the individual’s rights by providing that a circuit Judge “who willfully or corruptly refuses or neglects to consider an application, action, or motion for, habeas corpus is guilty of mal-feasance in office.” [Citation omitted.]. . . [P]laintiff was . . . attempting to communicate with a lawyer or relative in order to obtain her release. Defendant prevented her from doing so. We . . . hold that the actions
on the part of defendant constitute false imprisonment. . . .

A person temporarily committed to an institution pursuant to statute certainly must have the right to make telephone calls to an attorney or relatives. We realize that it may be necessary to restrict visits to a patient confined to a mental institution. However, the same does not apply to the right of a patient to call an attorney or relative for aid in obtaining his release. This does not mean that an individual has an unlimited right to make numerous telephone calls, once he is confined pursuant to statute. Rather, it does mean that such an individual does have a
right to communicate with an attorney and/or a relative in attempt to obtain his release. Dr. Bolter was unable to give any valid reason why a person should not be allowed to consult with an attorney.

We do not believe there is such a reason. While problems may be caused in a few cases because of this requirement, the facts in the instant case provide cogent reasons as to why such a rule is necessary. Mrs. Stowers was able to obtain her release after she made the telephone call to her relatives and they, in turn, obtained an attorney for her. Prior to this, because of the order of no communications, she was virtually held a prisoner with no chance of redress. We, therefore, agree with the Court of Appeals that there was sufficient
evidence from which a jury could find that Dr. Wolodzko had committed false imprisonment. The Court of Appeals is affirmed.

Judicial activism and judicial restraint

/in /by

For this assignment, you will debate two judicial philosophies: judicial activism and judicial restraint. You will analyze the effect these philosophies have on court decisions involving constitutional issues.

Instructions

Review two examples of judicial activism—the famous cases of Brown v. Board of Education, which ended school segregation, and Roe v. Wade, which decriminalized abortion. Also, review two examples of judicial restraint—Bush v. Gore, which stopped a vote recount in Florida during the 2000 presidential election, and District of Columbia v. Heller, which struck down a ban on handguns. You can find information about these cases using an Internet search engine or at the following link: FindLaw.

Think about how these court decisions impact the law.

Post your answers to the following questions on the Discussion Board:

  • How do these court decisions illustrate the role of courts in creating case law?
  • What role should courts play in creating case law?

A solid Legal representation for the accused

/in /by

Our criminal courtroom is designed to have two parties, the prosecutor and the defense, along with a jury in most trials, with a judge overseeing everything. This design is set up with different duties and responsibilities. The prosecutor is seeking justice for the victim, the defense is trying to provide a solid legal representation for the accused, the jury (if appropriate, not all trials will have a jury) will decide guilt or innocence, and the judge makes sure all legal policies and procedures are followed, as well as decides the sentence if there is a guilty plea.

This structure is set up to include checks and balances but sometimes (not often) one or more of the parties involved has their own agenda and unethical (and even illegal) decisions are made. Explain your choices in this scenario by addressing the following questions: What are attorney-client privileges? What are the exceptions to this rule?

Do you think it is honored more often than not by attorneys and the court system? Why or why not? Give examples to support your position.

 

2. Explain the plea bargain process. Provide several examples of how this process works. Do you agree with plea bargains? Why/why not?