Discuss the concept of courts of equity and two remedies that are available in a medical malpractice situation. In the review case Tyler Chase Harper vs. Poway Unified School District referenced in the e-Activity above, Kozinski, the Circuit Judge dissenting writes: “I believe we must also address Harper’s claim that he is entitled to an injunction against the school’s harassment policy on grounds of substantial overbreadth.” Interpret the injunction being used in this case and justify why it would be the appropriate choice ***e-activity** Review the case Tyler Chase Harper v. Poway Unified School District. Be prepared to discuss. Review the case Garratt v. Dailey. Be prepared to discuss. Equitable remedies.
ORDER HERE A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
Tyler Chase Harper v. Poway Unified School District, 445 F.3d 1166, is a case in which a high school sophomore student (Tyler Chase Harper) was detained in the principal’s office for a class day wearing a t-shirt that disparaged the homosexual community. The principal took no further action against him. Following the incident, Tyler filed a suit against the school citing violations of his first amendment rights. The issue before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit was whether forbidding a student from wearing clothes with derogatory statements in the school premises was a violation of the student’s first amendment rights. Equitable remedies. The case was presented in the court of appeals before a three-judge bench. Two judges affirmed that the school district should not enjoined in the case. The dissenting judge presented concerns about the adequacy of proof and potential implications of the decision on the first amendment rights of students. The case shows the use of equitable remedies in which focus is more on justice rather than precedent. In fact, it is an injunction type of equitable remedy in which the court made a decision on whether the school was in breach of its contract with the student and if it could issue an order of injunction to stop the school from acting against the student (Schubert, 2015). Equitable remedies.
Garratt v. Dailey, 46 Wn.2d 197, 279 P.2d 1091, is a case in which Naomi Garratt accused Brain Dailey (a five-year old child) of intentional assault and battery. That is because he pulled out a lawn chair she was about to sit on causing her to be injured. The issue before the court was what constituted willful and unlawful intent in an action of battery, and how to assess Brian’s actions. The court determined that the defendant could only be found liable for battery if he/she knew with certainty that the plaintiff intended to sit down on the chair he/she removed. Equitable remedies. The Supreme Court of Washington referred the case back to the lower court to make the determination in whether the defendant had substantial certainty that his actions would cause harm, which would qualify him as liable for battery. This is a case on restitution as an equitable relief. Restitution was sought as a remedy applicable to the intentional harm under expectation of protection/non harm (Schubert, 2015). The two cases show how the courts engaged in debate that balanced interests and harm, a hallmark of courts of equities. Equitable remedies.