Critiques Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Critiques - Essay Example Also, one may not know the limit of how much information the client should e given before they make a decision and hence may end up giving too much information. Before one can give consent, there are four elements of informed consent that a client needs to have. These are competence, voluntariness, full information and comprehension. A client must in all instances be able to consent to treatment without hindering factors. These factors include lack of adequate information or the inability to understand the information given since in most instances; it is expressed in some to understand medical jargon. In as much as a client could be willing allow the collection and keeping of information regarding them, there arises the question of confidentiality. Many at times, confidentiality of the right to privileged communication is breached. The fear of client’s information being shared with third parties is an enormous hindrance to successful medical services as clients may not be willing to give truthful of information regarding their conditions. More so, not all countries recognize the right of privileged communication and thus there is no guarantee of confidentiality. All medical practitioners are required to warn clients and their close affiliates of nay risks of infection, side effects associated with treatments or any harmful behavior of patients such as violence. This is quite contradictory in regard to confidentiality that should be enjoyed by clients. It may also be quite impossible to warn a dying patient on the harmful side effects of a drug when the best thing to do is save their lives. Some clients may be threatening to commit suicide hence calling for intervention and the need to warn the family members or other authorities in charge of them. Clients could have consented to treatment and record keeping believing that their information will be treated with confidentiality. However, cases may arise that call for access

Cranes Incidences Essay Example for Free

Cranes Incidences Essay Industrial safety is an important component in determining success in industrial operations. It is important that industry players develop their systems in a manner that is appreciative of safety to be in line with legal requirements for industrial operations and also ensure high levels of motivation among their employees. Motivation within any workforce is important in ensuring that operational goals are driven at and is considered a factor that can define organizational propensity to failure. Reputation of an industry entity is placed at risk if it employs approaches to operations that are risky to its workers and even customers. It is thus apparent that industrial entities have a lot to lose should they choose to operate in a manner that does not show appreciation for the role played by safety within their industries in ensuring ethical, legal and successful operations. Despite this knowledge being firmly ingrained within industries, cases of crane accidents have continued to maim and even kill industrial workers. A review of recent cases to determine the causes of the accident and make recommendation on avenues that can be used in addressing this challenge is therefore aimed at ensuring improvement in working conditions for crane workers. Review of Industrial Crane Accidents A shocking revelation in review of existing rules and crane accidents that have occurred in the recent past is that OSHA has not updated its rules for workers who operate cranes for the last 38 years (CraneAccidents. com, 2008). The labor department estimates of the fatalities shows that there are at least 82 cases of crane accidents per year (CraneAccidents. com, 2008). According to the labor department, a majority of the accidents are caused by operator errors and prevailing weather conditions especially wind (CraneAccidents. com, 2008). The differences between the figures reported by the government department OSHA and international unions of operating engineers creates an unclear picture of the extent of the problem. In one of the incidents, a rental crane failed while offloading which led to the death of two workers. The rental crane which is operated by Ocean energy let go of the load that smashed two workers to immediate death (MMS, 2009). Though the accident is still under investigation, preliminary results show that that crane was poorly maintained and the cause are mainly due to mechanical failure (MMS, 2009). Another accident that also involved a rental crane occurred during offloading (MMS, 2009). The accident which led to the death of one worker while leaving two workers with serious injuries was mainly due to poor disassembly of a rental crane (MMS, 2009). The crane incidences which are filled with inhumanity and pain are categorized as either minor or major cases (MMS, 2009. The definition of minor and major is dependent on the number of casualties though their potential for damage and loss of human life is immeasurable. In an incident that happened in Kentucky, a man who was standing next to a HTC-835 crane was dismembered and died one hour later in a hospital when the counterweight came around and struck him in the back (CraneAccidents. com, 2009). The unconscious body as found pinned between a counterweight and a bed of a truck (CraneAccidents. com, 2009). One of the factors that have been cited as having played a role in the incident is the fact that there was no warning tape around the crane (CraneAccidents. com, 2009). Discussion of Causes In the first case poor maintenance of the crane that led to failure is to blame for the incident. Though the potential that cranes have in causing incidents is known, rental companies and even organization can still choose to use cranes that have not been properly serviced. Ignorance is not the case rather irresponsibility by management and worker that leads to use of cranes that could pose danger to human life and even damage property is to blame. Irresponsibility of workers who were casualties in the incident is further brought out if their being under an offloading crane is considered. While working in an environment where crane activity is high one must have heard of incidences where cranes led to loss of lives. Taking heed of danger and appreciation of the potential that cranes have in causing damage would have pushed them into being within what can be referred to as a safe distance. Poor management of the disassembly exercise has been cited as the cause of the second incident. This lives room for a multitude of possibilities which include lack of proper training, poor supervision, lack of preparation and poor or lack of measures that can be used in ensuring that assembly and disassembly processes are carried out in the best way possible (CraneAccidents. com, 2009). Another important factor that should be noted in the second case is the involvement of a rental cranes and issues relating to management and mechanical failure. The third case is different from the others in that the victim and operators were unaware of the risks they were in. Labeling of potential risk has for a long term been used in industries to ensure that people aware of risks they are in. Cranes cause motion or objects that can smash human flesh to oblivion. Lack of a labels or a warning tapes around the cranes or any other moving object in an industrial setting is reflective of lack of appreciation of the potential that cranes have in causing damage to human life and property and lack of strong assessment measures for instance by OSHA to ensure that industrial entities operates within the developed safety framework. Analysis The causes of the accident can be looked at from at least five different dimensions. Irresponsibility, poor assessment systems, poor policy making, lack of appreciation of the potential that cranes have in damaging properties and lives and lastly lack of an effective systems that can develop social awareness on problem thus its address. Irresponsible actions for instance being under a moving crane and using cranes that have not been labeled as potential risks have led to loss of lives. Poor assessment systems are reflected in using cranes that have badly been maintained and making errors in disassembly. While technology and legal implications are changing rapidly to keep in touch with the needs of the society, the last development in OSHA with regards to crane operatives is nearly four decades ago. The relevance of the current policies to modern practice may be missing thus the lack of awareness on legal avenues that can be used in redress. Selecting rental cranes that are in bad shape and using cranes without labeling them all point to lack of appreciation of the potential that cranes have in damaging property and destroying lives. Poor policy making may also contribute to using cranes that are not in good shape and lack of counter measures to ensure cranes used are in good working condition. The expertise, skills and experience of crane operators are important in ensuring effective management of the operations; this must be ensured by all organizations to ensure human error is minimized. Legal measures and guideline like OSHA are also lacking in that the organization could use approaches that are lacking in safety and even lack labeling despite its potential risk yet remain operational. This is further brought out by the difficulties that victims face in seeking illegal interventions (CraneAccidents. com, 2009). Summary OSHA is not enough in reducing prevalence of the crane accidents. Though effective legal intervention measures can reduce and even force industrial entities to put in place effective safety measures, development of an appreciation of safety is vital to ensuring that measures are put in place. The current OSHA policies have to be reviewed to ensure they are up to date with the legal and technological factors that affect crane operations. Developing awareness on rights of crane users and highlighting the accidents will also play an important role in ensuring that industrial entities are wary of incidences. By developing awareness and helping victims seek legal redress, OSHA will ensure that organizations are aware of the negative image that can be developed by crane incidences. Responsibility is a personal issue that must be spread to all in industries. Safety training for workers would ensure that they seek their right to work in safe environments and develop awareness on risks presented by the environment they are in. It is only after appreciation of risk has been developed that effective programs can be developed.

Essay --

Abraham Lincoln, the 16th president of the United States was born on February 12th, 1809. Lincoln is one of the most famous presidents because of his leadership during a dire time in American history, the civil war. His presidency was served from March 1861 until the day he was assassinated in April 1865. Lincolns most prestige’s accomplishments include abolishing slavery, preserving the union and modernizing the economy. Abraham was the second child of Thomas and Nancy; he was born in a small log cabin on a farm in Kentucky. During his early life his family moved from Kentucky to Indiana in order to get out of slave territory. When Lincoln was nine his mother Nancy died of milk sickness, his father Thomas later remarried a widow named Sarah. Lincoln became very close to his new stepmother. He did not have much formal education but was a motivated self-educator. At age 22 Lincoln decided to leave home, he found a job taking goods by flatboat from New Salem to New Orleans. Once Lincoln arrived in New Orleans he witnessed a slave trade, this left a lasting impression on him. Abraham was brought up with the values of honesty and fairness; he carried these virtues throughout his life. Politics became part of Lincoln’s life in 1832 when he campaigned to be on the Illinois General Assembly. He was a member of the Whig Party. Lincoln was a captain of the Illinois Militia during the Black Hawk War, he never did see combat though. Later in his life Lincoln failed at some small business ventures. In 1837 he taught himself law and was accepted to the Illinois Bar, later that year Lincoln moved to Springfield became one of the most respected lawyers. In 1837 Lincoln made his first protest against slavery. On November 4, 1842, at the a... ... musical comedy in Lincolns state box on the balcony when Booth crept up behind Lincoln and shot Lincoln in the head at point blank range. Lincoln was mortally wounded and pronounced dead the next morning at 7:22 a.m. Lincolns attacker Booth jumped from the theater balcony breaking his leg, but was able to reach his horse and escape. Booth was on the run for 12 days before he was captured and shot. Lincolns legacy and accomplishments still live on today. Lincoln is remembered by most as a self-made man with good character. Lincoln guided are nation through one its craziest times and preserved the union. Lincoln is honored in many ways today from statues to his name being used in a wide variety of things. Lincoln’s remains were then transported to Springfield, Illinois by train. Many funerals were held as the train stopped at many cities in the North.

The Education System :: essays research papers

The Education System The education system in my country is different from U.S education; mostly it is similar to France education system. The education system in my country is very restricted and it is not easy to graduate from high school. I have been attending US colleges for almost four years now. I finished high school in my country and never get a chance to attend college in there. In this essay I would like to compare and contrast the differences between my high school education system and US education system. Even though, I never attend high school in US but I have some friends who told me about high school system. One of the differences is that in my country all high school students had to ware school uniform, but in here the high school student they can wear what ever they want. Second, there was no choice for us to take those classes that we want we had to take what was offered, in contrast in US high schools students can take a lest those classes that they like. Third, the exams in my country was pretty the same as US system.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  First of all, in my county all high students we had to wear uniform. We had to wear black skirts, white tops, black shoes and black tights. The good thing about uniform was that it wasn't expensive for parents to get uniform for their children each year, second, it was good for students to concentrate only on there classes and third it was very organized. For instance, in my family three person went to high school and parents bought us uniforms only once a year which was not very expensive, second every day when we waked up we didn't had to worry about what to wear and worrying that we don't have enough clothes. Therefor, wearing uniform was very good so most of our concentration was on our classes not on clothing. Finally, wearing uniform was very organize when we passed the rode everyone know that we were high school students. In contrast, in America high school students can wear any thing they want and there is no restriction. In my opinion, it is very expensive for parents to prepare different clothes for their children everyday. May be it is no problem for some parents, but in most of the cases like single working parent that has to work full time and have other expenses it is not easy to buy clothes for their children every day. For example, one of my friend's daughter goes to high

Case Memo: Howard Wolowitzz & Rajesh Koothrappalii Essay

THE PARTIES: 1.Howard Wolowitzz: eighty-seven years old, was an excellent engineer. He was a retired soldier who had served with the Canadian Army. He worked in Ontario later, and became a realtor and a developer of lands. 2.Rajesh Koothrappalii: fifty-five years old, was a chartered accountant. He has abundant experiences and background knowledge about the hotel businesses. ABSTRACT: Howard Wolowitzz and Rajesh Koothrappalii first met in 2000. From then on, Wolowitzz and Koothrappali decided to begin investing in the hotel businesses to make profits under the suggestion of Koothrappalii as Koothrappalii was very familiar with the hotel industry. Through several investments on the similar projects, Howard Wolowitzz fundamentally believed that he and Rajesh Koothrappalii had been into a â€Å"partnership† when conducting business activities. After Koothrappalii personally made some investments without Wolowitzz, Wolowitzz thought that he was â€Å"betrayed† by Koothrappalii and should be compensated by a portion of earnings from Koothrappalii since Koothrappalii violated the â€Å"fiduciary duties† towards his â€Å"partner† to make a â€Å"secret profit.† ANALYSIS: 2001-2003: Invested in North Etobicoke In 2001, Howard Wolowitzz and Rajesh Koothrappalii invested one hundred thousand Canadian dollars each in a company in north Etobicoke which is an electoral district in Ontario, and both became the shareholders of the company. After the subdivision of the company was sold in 2003, Howard Wolowitzz and Rajesh Koothrappalii received five hundred thousand Canadian dollars respectively. In this situation, Howard Wolowitzz and Rajesh Koothrappalii are not in a partnership, but both are the equal shareholders of the same company. First of all, they never conduct a written or oral agreement that ensures their partnership in doing any kinds of business. Moreover, according to the Partnership Act., the partnership means two or more people running a common business and having the aim of earning profit are in a relationship called partnership. The partners in the partnership have to share the same venture and profit in business which they are carrying on. Each partner is fully liable for the debt of the firm in their partnership, and general partners should get actively involved in the management of the business. However, in terms of the definition of the partnership entity, Howard Wolowitzz and Rajesh Koothrappalii did not carry on the same business and not be fully liable for the debt of the firm they invested. Instead, they are the shareholders with limited liabilities, and they do not have authorities to make any decisions in management while investing in business. Additionally, they do not share the profit earned in real. The profit they earned is based on their personal investment rather than the shared one. Therefore, at that time, Howard Wolowitzz and Rajesh Koothrappalii were two persons who individually invested in the same firm and obtained their own profit under the suggestion of Koothrappalii. 2004-2006: Invested in Mr. Sport Hotel In June 2004, Rajesh Koothrappalii advised again that he and Howard Wolowitzz invested in the same hotel near Niagara Fall, called the Mr. Sport Hotel. This time they invested and became the shareholders of the Mr. Sport Hotel. Differently, Rajesh Koothrappalii, who was based on his excellent experience and knowledge about the hotel industry, involved in the management and arrangement of the hotel. As a â€Å"manager,† Koothrappalii was remunerated by an amount of ten thousand Canadian dollars per month. Until the early 2006, the Mr. Sport Hotel was sold. Meanwhile, Howard Wolowitzz and Rajesh Koothrappalii received one million Canadian dollars respectively from their shares through the sales of the hotel. Although Rajesh Koothrappalii participated into the management of the hotel and also invested his capital to the hotel, he and Howard Wolowitzz were still not in a partnership under this condition. To make sure a partnership legally exists, the Nature of Partnership in the Partnership Act states a few rules have to be followed. One of them claims that all partners who contribute the same amount of capital to the firm should share the same responsibility of debts and profits earned. Also, they all ought to actively participate in the management, arrangement and decision making of the business they run. Nevertheless, even though Rajesh Koothrappalii involved in the management of the Mr. Sport Hotel, Howard Wolowitzz did not involve in. As demonstrated above, they still did not assume the same venture and share the same profit of the business together; even they did not run the same business. Obviously, their business actions violate the Nature of the Partnership which claims â€Å"Partnership is the relation that subsists between persons carrying on a business in common with a view to profit.† It is undoubted that there was no any partnership relationship between Wolowitzz and Koothrappalii. The business relationship between these two persons is just that they are the shareholders of the same hotel, and Rajesh Koothrappalii is the manager of the Mr. Sport Hotel as well. We suppose that the Mr. Sport Hotel was run by a corporation. Rajesh Koothrappalii would be a director and shareholder in this situation since he managed and invested in the Mr. Sport Hotel. Considering about the duty of good faith, a director holds this duty towards his shareholders for making his own best judgments to fulfill the best interests of the company. However, Rajesh Koothrappalii did not increase the loss and cost of the company when he was the director of the Mr. Sport Hotel. On the contrary, he generated the profits of shareholders, and we can assume that he executed the duty of good faith towards Howard Wolowitzz and other shareholders. A Few Years Later: Invested Separately In a few years later, Rajesh Koothrappalii sometimes suggested Howard Wolowitzz to invest on the same project with him; sometimes he followed the investment opportunities alone without noticing Howard Wolowitzz. Those actions made Wolowitzz feel that he was betrayed and excluded by Rajesh Koothrappalii who made a â€Å"secret benefit.† In fact, there is still no partnership here among Howard Wolowitzz and Rajesh Koothrappalii. Besides what was illustrated above that they repeated the same actions and fell into the same circumstances: no shared profits, no shared risks, no personal liability towards the full debts, no involvement in management of the business and no running of the same business. There were several core problems appeared. More fundamentally, no written or oral agreement was given to prove their business relationship, and neither Howard Wolowitzz nor Rajesh Koothrappalii was entitled to be an agent of their partnership if the business relationship exists. When a person becomes a partner of a partnership to carrying on a business, he is entitled to sign as an agent or a representative of the whole partnership and the other partners as well. A person, as a delegate of the partnership, has an apparent authority to sign a contract and conducts business activities to make a profit to the partnership. The contracts he signs and the business activities he involves in should be considered as an effective document. However, none of them has an apparent authority when they conduct business activities outside their â€Å"partnership.† In other words, none of them can be considered as a legal agent of the â€Å"partnership,† and they cannot make decisions on behalf of the â€Å"partnership† legally. Moreover, without notification, no other people outside their â€Å"partnership† would consider them into a partnership and treated them as legal partners in business. The public did not realize and acknowledge that Howard Wolowitzz and Rajesh Koothrappalii are legal partners in a partnership. The absence of the apparent authority is not the only problem. To be one partner in a partnership, everyone has a responsibility to fulfill the fiduciary duties with each other. As noted in Partnership Act, â€Å"[p]artners are bound to render true accounts and full information affecting the partnership to any partner or his legal representatives.† That is to say that the accurate information and accounts having influences on the partnership must be available to all partners. Standing on the Howard Wolowitzz’s point of view, Rajesh Koothrappalii â€Å"concealed† the information of investment opportunities of their partnership, and reserved the beneficial opportunities to himself. Furthermore, Howard Wolowitzz believed that â€Å"[e]very partner must account to the firm for any benefit derived by him without the consent of the other partners from any transaction concerning the partnership or form any use by him of the partnership property, name or business connection.† Indeed, Rajesh Koothrappalii did not notice Howard Wolowitzz about some investments although he invested by himself. It is not necessary for him to inform Howard Wolowitzz since no real partnership exists between them. 2011ï ¼Å¡ Purchased a Hotel Rajesh Koothrappalii spent two million Canadian dollars on an obsolete hotel located on Queen Street at the downtown area of Toronto and started to renovate it with his two sons. Then, he had an agreement with Triden Investment Inc. (abbreviated as TII) and allowed TII to set up residential condominiums on his place. Also, they agreed that they would divide their profits through selling the condominiums. Koothrappalii estimated that he would gain a profit of around six million Canadian dollars. The Partnership Act clarifies some elements of partnership, including having a real relationship between partners, carrying on a business in common and having a view to profit. At first, according to this time period of this case, it is certain that Rajesh Koothrappalii and Triden Investment Inc. had an agreement about the construction of the condominiums and his two sons Rajesh Koothrappalii entrusted TII to build the condominiums. However, they did not create any agreement about a partnership relationship between them in a written or oral manner. In addition, Koothrappalii and TII did not run a business in common. It is a fact that Koothrappalii had an ownership of property which was the hotel he purchased, but he did not manage and operate the construction. Not only did TII construct the hotel, but also managed the whole process of construction. Furthermore, Koothrappalii and TII had a share of profit. Although the share of profit is a key point of partnership, they cannot be regarded as a partnership if this point is only condition they have in common. With the perspective of TII, Rajesh Koothrappalii and Howard Wolowitzz do not have any partnership relationship in this construction project. Rajesh Koothrappalii individually signed an agreement with TII about the construction of condominiums without acting as a partner of the â€Å"partnership† with Howard Wolowitzz. TII, as an outsider from the â€Å"partnership† between Rajesh Koothrappalii and Howard Wolowitzz, did not acknowledge and discover the partnership’s existence between Rajesh Koothrappalii and Howard Wolowitzz. Thus, it shows that Wolowitzz does not have an apparent authority of a partnership and does not make the third party know he had a partnership with Rajesh Koothrappalii. In addition, Rajesh Koothrappalii purchased the hotel and had an agreement with TII by himself and Wolowitzz did not get involved in these procedures. Therefore, Koothrappalii and Wolowitzz do not carry on a business in common. More importantly, Koothrappalii and Wolowitzz do not share the profit of the construction. Sharing a profit between partners is an essential element in the partnership. CONCLUSIONï ¼Å¡ In terms of the above facts and analysis of this case, Rajesh Koothrappalii and Howard Wolowitzz do not have a partnership relationship. There is no adequate evidence to show that they acted as partners. The business behaviors and actions of Koothrappalii and Wolowitzz do not correspond to the definition of the partnership. Firstly, they never make a written or oral agreement of partnership between them in each business investment from the beginning to the end. Secondly, they do not carry on one business in common. Last but not least, they do not have a share of profits and costs. In this case, their actual business role are shareholders or investors, they do not form any typical forms of business. The main reason is that they undertake and invest their own business separately. Despite of considering about the partnership relationship, Koothrappalii and Wolowitzz do not have any partnership liabilities since they do not form a partnership. From a legal point of view, Wolowitzz is not entitled to have claims on the compensation about fiduciary duties like secret benefits from Koothrappalii. Conversely, Koothrappalii has no an obligation to compensate for Wolowitzz in fiduciary duties because they are not in a partnership. In conclusion, the partnership between Rajesh Koothrappalii and Howard Wolowitzz does not exist in this case. ADVICEï ¼Å¡ To Howard Wolowitzzï ¼Å¡ According to my analysis and conclusions of this case, I suggest Howard Wolowitzz not to sue Rajesh Koothrappalii. The above analysis reveals that his appeal is likely to be rejected and he may lose a lawsuit because there is no any evidence to show that Rajesh Koothrappalii and Howard Wolowitzz have a partnership relationship. Wolowitzz’s business actions cannot prove that he has the conditions of partnership. Thus, Koothrappalii does not have any liability of partnership to compensate for Howard Wolowitzz. Also, Wolowitzz misunderstand the concepts of partnership. He thinks that he is in a partnership but actually he is not in law. So Koothrappalii has no liability to him. However, there are some situations in this case I’d like to mention. Initially, Koothrappalii suggested Howard Wolowitzz to invest many businesses every time. If Koothrappalii mislead Howard Wolowitzz to invest a business with his advice, Wolowitzz may lose a lot of money and this investment is very beneficial to Koothrappalii to earn more profit. It is apparent that he provides Howard Wolowitzz with inaccurate information in order to achieve his business purpose. When this kind of situation happens, Wolowitzz can sue Koothrappalii and he has a personnal liability to Wolowitzz because his business behavior violates the law of business defraud. Nevertheless, If Koothrappalii suggests him to invest and offer true and reliable investment information to Howard Wolowitzz and Wolowitzz obtains the loss of profits in his own investment, this problem will be attributed to Wolowitzz instead of Koothrappalii. In this situation, Koothrappalii has no any liability to Wolowitzz, and he does not violate the law of business defraud as well. In addition, if the Mr. Sport Hotel is run by a corporation, Koothrappalii will be a director and shareholder of th e Mr. Sport Hotel from 2004 to 2006. At that time, Howard Wolowitzz is also a shareholder of that company but not a director of the company. If Wolowitzz can find evidence that Koothrappalii’s investment as a director does not give the best interests to the Mr. Sport Hotel, Howard Wolowitzz may sue him in fiduciary duties as a shareholder. In this situation, Rajesh Koothrappalii violates the duty of good faith. But I’d like to warn Howard Wolowitzz that there is a limitation period of a contract and tort appeal which is two years. From the time of this situation to now, the time range is around six years. Thus, it is less likely to appeal successfully for Wolowitzz. An another thing I’d like to suggest to Howard Wolowitzz is the concept of apparent partners. We know Howard Wolowitzz are not in a partnership so he cannot be related to the concept of apparent partners in this case. However, if he wants to establish a partnership with other people in the future, he has to pay attention to his apparent authority of a partnership. When he and his partners are going to corporate with the third party, he is bound to make the third party notice that he and his partners have a partnership relationship. This is one of the most significant points in the partnership. Furthermore, this case will cost Howard Wolowitzz a plenty of money, energy and time. If he loses the lawsuit, he will spend more costs on it since he has to bear a part of the winning party’s legal fees. Howard Wolowitzz should realize that he almost has little chance to win this lawsuit so I suggest that he had better not to sue Rajesh Koothrappalii. It will be not good for him. Time and energy are very important to him because the opportunity cost of time and energy are earnings. He can take advantage of the time he puts on this lawsuit to invest and develop more businesses for earning profits. Eventually, I’d like to recommend Howard Wolowitzz to study and learn the statutes and laws of business in Canada via different kinds of social media like TV news, magazines, newspaper or Internet. These are good and convenient ways for Howard Wolowitzz to understand the business law further. He can develop his law knowledge better. He also can know various cases about business law on news. It is a good source to pay attention to many laws that he does not really know. Also, Howard Wolowitzz can search for some laws on the Internet. This method will show him about laws fast and efficiently. There are some good business laws on the website, such as e-laws on Service Ontario website. Furthermore, going to library is a nice choice to read the statutes of business law if he is interested in more business law. To the lawyer, Ms.Littigator: From my analysis and judgments of this case, I advise that Ms.Littigator had better not help Howard Wolowitzz sue Rajesh Koothrappalii because the probability of losing a lawsuit for this case is very large. Firstly, it is hard for you to win a lawsuit for this case because Howard Wolowitzz and Rajesh Koothrappalii do not have a partnership legally. They just acted as shareholders to invest their business separately all the time. With the perspective of a lawyer, Ms.Littigator cannot have sufficient and strong evidence to prove that they have a real partnership relationship. Secondly, I found that a situation may bring a benefit to Howard Wolowitzz. If the Mr. Sport Hotel is run by a corporation and Howard Wolowitzz have evidence that Rajesh Koothrappalii did not make the best interests to the corporation called the Mr.Sport Hotel rather than himself as a director, it is possible that you may help Wolowitzz sue Koothrappalii in the fiduciary duty of corporation rather than the fiduci ary duty of partnership. However, the most important thing is that a limitation period of contract and tort appeal is two years. Thus, I still think that it is good for you to not help Wolowitzz sue Koothrappalii. What is more, you are more likely to lose your profit, energy and time. If you lose the lawsuit, you will not attain the remuneration from the losing party. You also lose your time and energy on it. Actually, you can use the time you put on this lawsuit to deal with a new lawsuit which you can win. Finally, if you really would like to help Howard Wolowitzz, I have another several suggestions. Howard Wolowitzz was a veteran in his early life. He may not know the newest version of the business law. As he became a land developer and always carry on a business by himself, Howard Wolowitzz may not have much chance to collaborate with others and form a partnership when doing business. This makes him unfamiliar with and misunderstands the meaning of a partnership, and was mistaken about the business relationships between Koothrappalii and him. To this point, since Koothrappalii and Wolowitzz have been in an acquaintanceship for a long time, they must know each other very well, and may know that Wolowitzz did not know the business law of partnership a lot. However, when Koothrappalii and Wolowitzz conducted investments, Koothrappalii did not indicate their relationships in business unequivocally to Wolowitzz and even did not mention that they are personal investors but not partners. There is a point hidden here that Koothrappalii may mislead Wolowitzz with the â€Å"partnership† relationship between them, and made Wolowitzz firmly believed that they are in a partnership. The key conditions including the age, a retired soldier, the familiarity with business laws and the mistake caused by a long-time friend Koothrappalii can lead Ms.Littigator and Howard Wolowitzz to a relatively advantageous position in the court. Unless Ms.Littigator emphasizes the characteristics of Wolowitzz that he is older, not knowing business laws so much and believed Koothrappalii but was misled by him, Ms.Littigator does not have any chance to win this lawsuit. IMPRESSION OF HOWARD WOLOWITZZ: Howard Wolowitzz was once an engineer and a war veteran. Thus, he did not have any business experiences in the past few years. That’s why he does not totally understand and know the business laws. In any court action, Howard Wolowitzz is a typical person who is hard to win the lawsuit. He does not have patience to analyze his situations in different ways. He does something on impulse and does not considerate about one thing carefully and comprehensively. This kind of incautious personality is more likely to lead him to make mistakes in other cases as similar as the case we analyzed before. Also, Howard Wolowitzz is an easily angry and not tolerant person. When he thought Rajesh Koothrappalii hide him to make a â€Å"secret benefit†, he was very angry about Rajesh Koothrappalii and want to sue him immediately. This fact also reveals that he made decisions fast and this kind of attitude causes him to make mistakes easily. What’s more, he did something with his emotions. For example, he loves Rajesh Koothrappalii as â€Å"a son†. Actually, Rajesh Koothrappalii is not his son and Howard Wolowitzz did not realize that he did not have authorities to interfere with Rajesh Koothrappalii’s own business. Therefore, a person has similar personalities and attitudes like Howard Wolowitzz is more likely to make mistakes in and misinterpret the law.

Beastiality essays

Beastiality essays This is the story of Danny and his dog Mike who face many dangers in the wilderness. You can learn from this that good can come from things you once thought were useless and change to This story takes place in the wilderness of the Wintapi. It is mostly in the woods and rough The main character in the story is Danny who gets caught in a snowstorm. The major-minor characters are Ross , which is Dannys dad , and Mike the dog. The conflict in the story is character vs. nature and character vs. man. Together, Danny and Mike face a snowstorm and then prove to all the people in the Wintapi that Irish setters are the Danny and Ross always thought of Mike as the runt of the litter. Even though he was the son of a champion , he was considered a muttonhead. It wasnt until Danny and Mike were stranded in the woods that Mike began to change. Before then , he was hard headed and didnt listen. Now after his experiences in the woods he begins to mature an live up to blood line. Ross knew he had it in him all along but now he just has to prove he is the best to all the people in the Wintapi. Mike is entered in a field trial against one of the best English setters around. After finding more birds , Mike is the winner of the test. Danny and Ross are very proud that they discovered the true Many people in the Wintapi thought that English setters were the best dogs around. But after Mike won the trial , the Irish setter name got all the credit and respect that it deserved. I thought The story was interesting because I like those kind of adventure stories. ...

The Phenomenon of Phil essays

The Phenomenon of Phil essays The influence that Dr. Phil McGraw has on todays society is remarkable and his tell-it-like-it-is style is just what the Doctor ordered. Let us begin with Dr. Phils introduction to America on the Oprah Winfrey Show in 1998. Ironically, the year before is when the two first met in Texas. The Texas Cattlemans Association was suing Oprah Winfrey and Dr. Phil McGraw was part of Oprahs defense as Dr. McGraw is cofounder of Courtroom Sciences, the worlds leading litigation consulting firm. Oprah won her fight with the Texas Cattlemans Association and Dr. Phil won a great friendship with Oprah. After being introduced to Oprahs viewers, Dr. Phil was quickly made a household name and Americans wanted more. Hence, The Dr. Phil Show was born, with the help of Harpo productions, which is owned by none other than, Oprah Winfrey. According to the Nielson Media Research Group, The Dr. Phil show had 15.1 million viewers on September 16, 2004, which leads me to believe he is only getting better. If you do not watch television, there are several other ways to hear about Dr. Phils wisdom. He has written five, #1 New York Times Best Sellers. Without a doubt, he has saved many relationships and even marriages with his book, Relationship Rescue that comes with a workbook so the reader is actively involved with the book and it is proposals. Many, many people have taken his weight loss challenge on his show and even more have bought his, Ultimate Weight Loss Solution and are following his seven keys to weight loss freedom. Then, Self Matters with over 2,000,000 copies sold is a great source to help anyone find their, authentic self. His weight loss solution has even been implemented into many localized programs and support groups. All anyone has to do is buy the book, Ultimate Weight Solution and log onto http://ww...