Legal Studies coursework Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

sub judice Studies - Coursework ExampleThe fourth answer is a summary of the case 23 Wis. J.L. Gender & Socy 41. Keywords statutes, laws Answer to interrogative sentence 1 Drunk driving is a serious civil offence recognized across the unify States of America. The two statutes that I wish to discuss with regard to this topic are Mich. Comp. Laws sec. 257.625 and V C fragment 23152. (Michigan laws) According to the statute of Michigan, a person does not have the right to blend in a fomite on either a highway or any place of public while at a lower place the influence of alcohol. In such a case, as he is elate, it might lead to injury for both(prenominal) the vehicle and others, not to forget the unmarried himself. If the person who operates a vehicle after being intoxicated causes the death of a person, he will be charged of a felony or crime. The per se stock alcohol level for a person driving in the state of Michigan has to be .08 and his slide fastener tolerance level sho uld not exceed .02. If caught, the person will be implied with the consent of law. If the offence has been connected for the first cartridge holder, the defendants license may be hang for a period not exceeding 6 months, however, consequently, the suspension period can go up to more than than one class as well. After the moment time an offense is created, the person will have to do time in jail and undergo education pertaining to alcohol usage. According to the California statute that follows drunk driving, more or less, the law applied is the same as well. It states that it is against the law for an individual to drive or operate a vehicle if he or she is under the influence of any drugs or alcohol. The per se alliance alcohol level for this statute applied is also .08 and if there is more than that alcohol found in the blood, the person is committing an offense. (California laws) However, the zero tolerance level in California is .01 and the license of the person is only su spended for a period not exceeding for months after the first time that he commits the offense. After the second and third offenses however, the license may be taken away for 2-4 years and unlike the laws applied in Michigan, the vehicle of the person in California may be confiscated after the third time the individual commits the offense of drunk driving. Answer to question 2 Bluebook citation roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S. Ct. 705, 35 L. Ed. 2d 147, 1973 U.S (1973) This case was dissented by DAs Office v. Osborne, 129 S. Ct. 2308, 174 L. Ed. 2d 38, 2009 U.S. LEXIS 4536, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 945 (U.S. 2009) (129) Earlier case Roe v. Wade, 314 F. Supp. 1217, 1970 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11306 (N.D. Tex. 1970) Later overruled by Garcia v. San Antonio Metro. Transit Auth., 469 U.S. 528, 105 S. Ct. 1005, 83 L. Ed. 2d 1016, 1985 U.S. LEXIS 48, 53 U.S.L.W. 4135, 36 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) P34995, 102 Lab. Cas. (CCH) P34633, 27 pay , &, Hour Cas. (BNA) 65 (1985) Answers for question 3 566 A.2d 227 Parallel Citation Ruetgers-Nease Chemical Co. v. Firemens Ins. of Newark, 236 N.J. Super. 473, 566 A.2d 227, 1989 N.J. Super. LEXIS 385 (App.Div. 1989) (192) No cases give a positive treatment of this case. In fact, only two cases have been creditd after it that criticize or cite a dissenting opinion for the same. They are 1. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, London v. Foster Wheeler Corp., 192 Misc. 2d 468, 746 N.Y.S.2d 776, 2002 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1074 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2002) 2. GE v. California Ins. Guar. Assn, 997 S.W.2d 923, 1999 Tex. App. LEXIS 6732, 9937 Tex.