Using the Westlaw service and the Keysite feature to complee this Research Paper

Using the Westlaw service and the Keysite feature to complee this project - Research Paper Example08-55671, 08-55708)This is a case where an African-American petitioner sought writ of habeaus corpus after being convicted of first degree murder, blink of an eye degree robbery, and kidnapping for robbery. The conviction also includes affirmance of his sentence to life coupled with a year in prison without parole. Nonetheless, this case though not yet overruled has received some negative treatment from the followers caseIn this case, some white police officers who were being rehired as entry-level officers after their resignation, brought suit alleging that the city had violated Title VII and Equal Protection Clause when they were denied realization for their earlier years of services. The credit was give to African-American officer who were also in the process of being rehired. Despite the court sentiment that Fair Pay Act apply retroactively on officers claims, paycheck accrua l rule applied to officers 1983 claims, and that res judicata barred offices pay discrimination claims, the case has received negative treatment without being overruled fromIn this case, a former employee of Home Depot, Ames brought action against former employer with allegations that the termination received violated the Family and Medical abdicate Act (FMLA) as well as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Amazingly, the United States District Court for the Illinois Northern District, granted summary judgment that was in favor of employer on all the counts brought forth by the employee. After employees appealed, the Courts of Appeal held that the employees alcohol abuse was not serious health condition to command for security under the FMLA and ADA, the termination was not retaliation for requesting for FMLA leave as the plaintiff alleged, and that the employee did not have both disability.Valentino, a municipal employee alleged that the mayor had terminated her against th e provisions of 1983. Her claim was that the