100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Summary C12 - Business Law Case Analysis 4, Awad v. Ziriax - Ashworth College $10.49   Add to cart

Summary

Summary C12 - Business Law Case Analysis 4, Awad v. Ziriax - Ashworth College

 14 views  1 purchase
  • Course
  • Institution

C12 - Business Law Case Analysis 4, Awad v. Ziriax - Ashworth College. Summarize the facts of the case Approval was received after gaining a majority of votes from Oklahoma residents on November 2nd, 2010 regarding an amendment called “Save our State Amendment”, which was to be made to th...

[Show more]

Preview 2 out of 6  pages

  • November 3, 2022
  • 6
  • 2022/2023
  • Summary
avatar-seller
Awad v. Ziriax 1

C12 - Business Law

Case Analysis 4

Awad v. Ziriax



Summarize the facts of the case

Approval was received after gaining a majority of votes from Oklahoma residents on

November 2nd, 2010 regarding an amendment called “Save our State Amendment”, which was to

be made to the Oklahoma Constitution. This amendment was created with the intent of preventing

courts within the state from both considering as well as using the Sharia Law during cases. If all

went accordingly, the amendment would have gone through certification by the Oklahoma Election

Board seven days later and would have been included within the Oklahoma State constitution. Two

days after the voters approved the amendment, Muneer Awad brought charges against individuals

on the Election Board in an effort to avoid certifying the results of the election. Paul Ziriax was the

Agency head on the Oklahoma Election Board and therefore the suit was stated in his name. Awad

was an avid Muslamic follower and also the executive director of the Oklahoma Chapter of the

Council on American-Islamic Relations. Awad that he was suing because he felt as though his rights

under the Establishment as well as the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment of the United

States Constitution were violated by the Save our State Amendment which was now approved. He

claimed that implementation of the amendment would cause multiple adverse consequences, such

as stigmatizing individuals who practice the Muslim faith, inhibiting the practice of Islam, disabling a

court from probating his last will and testament (which contained references to Sharia law), limiting

the relief Muslims can obtain from Oklahoma state courts, and fostering excessive entanglement

between the government and his

, Awad v. Ziriax 2

religion (Bagley, C. E. Managers and the Legal Environment: Strategies for Business.)

Awad received approval from the district court and was granted a preliminary

injunction which would cease the certification process for the amendment however

upon the approval, the members of the Oklahoma Election Board filed for an appeal.

Identify the parties and explain each party’s position

The plaintiff, Muneer Awad, was suing the Oklahoma Election Board Oklahoma Election

Board in an effort to stop the process of certification of votes received from the election

regarding the Save our State Amendment. Awad stated that the amendment was in violation of

the rights he was entitled to under the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First


Amendment of the United States Constitution. Awad received a preliminary junction

from the district court. The defendant, Oklahoma Election Board, brought forward an

appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit suggesting that the

claims made by the plaintiff were not justiciable and did not meet the requirement for

the case to be considered at a preliminary injunction.

Outline the case’s procedural history including any appeals

The proceeding started on November 4th when Awad brought charges against the

Oklahoma Election Board in an effort to stop the certification of the votes for the Save our State

Amendment. On November 9th, the Oklahoma District Court agreed to approve a temporary

restraining order on the certification process. The court then held an evidentiary hearing on

November 22nd to discuss the request made by Awad for a preliminary injunction to which was

granted approximately one week later. On December 1, the Oklahoma Election Board filed an

appeal, within an appropriate time frame, against the grant of the preliminary injunction. On

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller StudyConnect. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $10.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

67096 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now

Start selling
$10.49  1x  sold
  • (0)
  Add to cart