Laurel V. Hardy Main Issue: Laurel and Case Study

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document

Total Length: 726 words ( 2 double-spaced pages)

Total Sources: 1+

Page 1 of 2

Laurel v. Hardy

Main issue: Laurel and Hardy, a professional comic duo, entered into a contract that agreed if they ever disbanded their partnership, they would refrain from using each other's material without compensation to the other party. After the duo disbanded, Hardy continued to use the materials without paying Laurel. Laurel is suing Hardy for $500,000. Hardy travels and has thus not been properly served Court Papers and refuses to read the local paper or respond to the suit. Laurel motions for a default judgment and Court Costs, which is granted. Hardy appeals this because he has not been properly notified.

Relevant Legal Concept: Contractual law and Service of Summons and Judgment

Procedural Due Process: Service by registered mail and publication in local newspaper; the Court is not responsible if the person being served pleads ignorance.

Relevant Definitions: Substituted Service of Court documents

Relevant Case Law: Dorsey v. Gregg, 784 P. 2nd 154, Court of Appeals, Oregon, 1988

Rationale: The Court is not responsible if the person being served pleads ignorance. A Defendant who has been properly serviced defaults by failing to file an answer in a timely manner (Schubert, 2010, p. 161).

Ruling: Original Judgment is affirmed.

Stuck Writing Your "Laurel V. Hardy Main Issue: Laurel And" Case Study?

View All Our Example Laurel V. Hardy Main Issue: Laurel and Case Study

Have A Custom Example Essay Written



Case: State of California v. Marin

Main issue: Marin, a middle-aged male, developed severe lung problems after regularly smoking a potent variety of marijuana. Some of Marin's colleagues were arrested and charged with intent to manufacture and distribute marijuana. The DA wishes to subpoena Marin's doctor. Marin's attorney objects based on the physician-client privilege.

Relevant Legal Concept: Physician-Client Privilege

Procedural Due Process: Is the marijuana charge Federal or State; if State, were the plaintiff is holding valid medical cards?

Relevant Definitions: Legal concept protecting communications between a patient and doctor being used against the patient; part of the rules of evidence. No Relevant Case Law: Not recognized under the Federal Rules of Evidence Law; State level varies based on law. Binkley v Allen (2001, 5th District Appellate Court) and State v. Spencer (1998). California Penal Codes

Rationale: If State Court - 2010 California Evidence Code, Article 6.994 states that physician-client privilege allows physician to refuse to disclose any confidential communication between the doctor and….....

Show More ⇣

     Open the full completed essay and source list


OR

     Order a one-of-a-kind custom essay on this topic


sample essay writing service

Cite This Resource:

Latest APA Format (6th edition)

Copy Reference
"Laurel V Hardy Main Issue Laurel And" (2013, October 17) Retrieved May 14, 2025, from
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/laurel-hardy-main-issue-laurel-124815

Latest MLA Format (8th edition)

Copy Reference
"Laurel V Hardy Main Issue Laurel And" 17 October 2013. Web.14 May. 2025. <
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/laurel-hardy-main-issue-laurel-124815>

Latest Chicago Format (16th edition)

Copy Reference
"Laurel V Hardy Main Issue Laurel And", 17 October 2013, Accessed.14 May. 2025,
https://www.aceyourpaper.com/essays/laurel-hardy-main-issue-laurel-124815
   

Open, View, and/or
Download this Document
order custom essay example