Unit VIII Briefing: Critical Legal Thinking
Research Paper
Read the call-of-the-question carefully, and follow the Instructions for each subject Prepare four briefing papers using the APA format for research papers, and upload them as one document for your response.■# Briefing Paper 1 : Critical Legal ThinkingInstructions:
Read Entergy Corporation v. Riverkeeper, Inc. in your Cheeseman textbook on pages 497-498.
Respond to the three Case Questions found in the Cheeseman textbook on page 498.
Assume your readers know the facts of the case as articulated in the Critical Legal Thinking, Ethics, and Contemporary Business questions. Argue both sides of all issues.4* Briefing Paper 2: Law Case with AnswersInstructions:
Read Sofowv. Wellner in your Cheeseman textbook on page 526.
Assume your readers know the facts of the case and are only seeking your opinions on the 80% reduction in rent.
Provide convincing arguments for both sides of your recommendations.
Critical Legal Thinking
Student’s Name
Date
The use of cost-benefit analysis by EPA needs to be initiated so as to determine how the power plants can be in a position to establish the technology that will assist to reduce pollution to the environment in the most effective way. Cost-benefit analysis is much essential to the power plants since installation of technology that will safeguard the environment may cost the plants a lot of money that may interfere with their operations. The use of cost-benefit analysis according to U. S Supreme Court ruling is fair in order to give a chance for the two sides to come into an agreement and considerations for each party (Ward, 2004). Failure for EPA to use cost-benefit analysis would have implications on the power plants as they would have to implement the use of technology that will help to reduce water pollution and these would have adverse effects on financial status of the plants. This would have violated the rights for the plants since they have to be involved before decisions are affecting them are made.
Law case with Answers
Tenants had the right to protest as the evidence showed that elevators they used skipped floors and opened on the wrong floors. The garbage that was in the garage, mice were seen in the scene. The place moreover had poor water proof materials as water ran in mail boxes and leaking air conditioners which was a clear indication that implied warrant of habitability was breached. Tenants had high expectations on the only designed glass enclosed building with high rent exerted to them this shows that everyone had high hope contrary to minimum amenities that were offered to them. The condition threatened their safety and healthy life wh...