Health Law

Chapter 4

Question 12

On July 5, 1884, four sailors were cast away from their ship in a storm 1,600 miles from the Cape of Good Hope. The four sailors were Captain Tom Dudley, Edwin Stephens, Edmund Brooks, and Richard Parker who was 17 years old and an inexperienced seaman. Dudley and Stevens took the life of Richard Parker after he became weakened from lack of food and water. They made this decision against Edmund Brooks’ agreement. According to the law a person may not sacrifice another person’s life to save their own. Because of this, Dudley and Stephens were guilty of murder. The Court does say that killing out of necessity in reference to self-defense is justified but only when the victim was threatening a life, not if the victim is innocent. They ended up being rescued 4 days later, had they not killed Parker then they would not have survived to see the rescue boat. Even though Brooks did not agree with taking Parker’s life, he should have been charged with some kind of crime because he took part in the cannibalism which had been formally outlawed by the British in the early 1800s.

Chapter 5

Question 11

In the case of 99 Cents Only Stores v. Lancaster Redevelopment Agency I would’ve ruled in favor of the 99 Cents Only Store because the city of Lancaster was abusing the power of eminent domain for money gain. According to the city of Lancaster, 99 Cents brought in $40,000 per year in sales tax while Costco was bringing more than $400, 000. However according to research, in its first full year of operation 99 Cents’ sales were in excess of $5 million. Costco was threatening to move to Palmdale if it could not expand. This is against public domain because it is benefiting a single organization. I don’t think that the results would be any different today after the Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Kelo v. New London, Connecticut case.

References

McAdams, Tony. Law, Business and Society, 9th Edition. McGraw-Hill Learning Solutions, 2009....