hicks v sparks case brief

Defendant had been present when his companion (co-defendant) shot and killed a man at the conclusion of a discussion. The court affirmed Hicks convictions for Kidnapping, Robbery in the Second Degree and Assault in the First Degree. Grant of Mere presence at the scene of a murder is not enough implicate someone as an accomplice, if there is no evidence that they had agreed to assist in the commission of the crime. Hicks v. United States | Case Brief for Law Students | Casebriefs Moreover, Hicks overheard her supervisor calling her names and claiming to find a way to get Hicks out of the division. . The bullet knocked Garvey down but he immediately got back up and continued running. Hicks v. Commonwealth | Case Brief for Law School | LexisNexis As a result of the reassignment, Hicks lost her vehicle and weekends off, and she was going to receive a pay cut and different job duties. Opinion and decision of the court . 12 Test Bank, Peds Exam 1 - Professor Lewis, Pediatric Exam 1 Notes, A&p exam 3 - Study guide for exam 3, Dr. Cummings, Fall 2016, Sociology ch 2 vocab - Summary You May Ask Yourself: An Introduction to Thinking like a Sociologist, Respiratory Completed Shadow Health Tina Jones, Dehydration Synthesis Student Exploration Gizmo, Module One Short Answer - Information Literacy, Seeley's Essentials of Anatomy & Physiology Chapter 1-4, 1-2 Short Answer Cultural Objects and Their Culture, Sample solutions Solution Notebook 1 CSE6040, Kami Export - Jacob Wilson - Copy of Independent and Dependent Variables Scenarios - Google Docs, Leadership class , week 3 executive summary, I am doing my essay on the Ted Talk titaled How One Photo Captured a Humanitie Crisis https, School-Plan - School Plan of San Juan Integrated School, SEC-502-RS-Dispositions Self-Assessment Survey T3 (1), Techniques DE Separation ET Analyse EN Biochimi 1. Exam 3 Cases. Hicks v. United States, 150 U.S. 442 (1893): Case Brief Summary Download PDF. negligence that caused the accident and the remaining, for Release. Citation22 Ill.368 F.2d 626 (4th Cir. Hicks v. Miranda | Case Brief for Law School | LexisNexis Any distinction between individual and official capacity suites was irrelevant. 1989); Mayer v. Baisier, 147 Ill. App.3d 150, 100 Ill.Dec. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's judgment on the grounds that the evidentiary materials were insufficient to warrant summary judgment. 25, 2014) (ORDER) (emphasis added) (citations omitted). Upon these purported facts, the district court granted Dr. Hicks and OST summary judgment without making any specific findings of fact or conclusions of law. Ch. The court further found defendant's presence alone would convict him if the prosecution proved there was a conspiracy between the defendant and the principal. random worda korean. Get Hicks v. United States, 150 U.S. 442 (1893), United States Supreme Court, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Plaintiff, administrator of Carol Greitens' estate, sued the United States Government under the Federal Torts Claims Act (Act) for a naval doctor's alleged medical malpractice, arguing that the doctor negligently failed to diagnose Greitens' ailment, causing her death. The car eventually stopped and Garvey heard a door open and close. Annotate this Case. On June 17, 2006, Appellant, Noah Hicks, picked up CarrollGarvey in his car at Garvey's brother's house in Radcliffe, Kentucky. At issue is the magnitude of Garvey's injuries, the evidence introduced at trial demonstrated Garvey suffered an injury that was either a "prolonged impairment of health" or "a prolonged loss or impairment of the function of [a] bodily organ." Finally, Hicks argued that the trial court erred by requiring Hicks witness, Ryan Spence, to take off his shirt and show an alleged swastika tattoo to the jury. The state had considerable interest in the execution of its process. Ass'n, 689 P.2d 947 (Okla. 1984), we conclude that there is no substantial controversy as to any material fact and that Dr. Hicks and OST are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. 15 terms. Use this button to switch between dark and light mode. During the interrogation, Hicks admitted he picked up Garvey. Respondent Hicks is a member of the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribes of western Nevada and lives on the Tribes' reservation. All of these office records, correspondence and hospital records were submitted by Dr. Hicks and OST with their joint motion for summary judgment. Don't Miss Important Points of Law with BARBRI Outlines (Login Required). Hicks appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court. There must be a prior agreement or conspiracy demonstrated by sufficient evidence to find Defendant guilty of the crime. The Keetch's wanted to open a ranch to help healing with horses but didn't have, and numbness in her hands: MRI reevaluated cervical disc herniation, Hicks filed a suit alleging that Sparks negligence had caused the accident and. Daugherty, supra; First State Bank of Ketchum v. Diamond Plastics Corp., 891 P.2d 1262 (Okla. 1995). Sheridan, Catherine L. Campbell, Best, Sharp, Holden, Sheridan, Best Sullivan, Tulsa, for Appellees. SPARKS v. SPARKS (2013) | FindLaw are unknown or uncertain however, litigation is inherently risky. Defendant appealed his conviction of accessory to murder. Procedural History: The court granted Sparks motion for summary judgement, largely because Defendant appealed arguing that he was present but did not participate. 539, 317 S.E.2d 583 (1984). 12 Test Bank - Gould's Ch. Typically Delaware courts Where state criminal proceedings are begun against federal plaintiffs after the federal complaint is filed but before any proceedings of substance on the merits have taken place in the federal court, the principles ofYounger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), should apply in full force. Issue(s) or question(s) of law . Defendant Hicks was jointly indicted with Stan Rowe for murder. 32 terms. Case brief- Hicks v. Sparks.docx. Course Hero is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university. knowledge with respect to the facts to which the mistake relates. Wheat Trust v. Sparks . Course Hero is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university. Defendant was convicted of murder. . Additionally, in the August 7th hospital records, the attending nurse noted the following in the patient data area: Finally, Spark's records at OST indicate that Dr. Livingston spoke with her on August 12th about the "confusion surrounding Dr. Hicks' refusal to operate on her and wanting to refer her to another physician." There was testimony from witnesses further away that Defendant took off his own hat and told the victim to take off your hat and die like a man immediately before his co-defendant fired his gun. Multiple overheard conversations using defamatory language plus the temporal proximity of only eight days from when she returned to when she was reassigned support the inference that there was intentional discrimination. Cross), The Methodology of the Social Sciences (Max Weber), Civilization and its Discontents (Sigmund Freud), Campbell Biology (Jane B. Reece; Lisa A. Urry; Michael L. Cain; Steven A. Wasserman; Peter V. Minorsky), Give Me Liberty! Defendant did not render assistance in actually completing the crime, but merely acted in the capacity of a witness. Under the circumstances, was Hicks constructively dismissed. Before going to the hospital, Garvey provided the police with the names of his attackers, and specifically named Rogers and Hicks as responsible for his injuries. Misdemeanor charges were filed in a state municipal court against two theater employees. 2000e(k). Without Dr. Bailey's opinion that surgery was safe for Sparks, Dr. Hicks canceled the surgery and began arranging for Sparks to be dismissed from the hospital to have surgery the following week. 5 LAW CHAPTER 13 (PREP) Flashcards | Quizlet Download PDF. 2. In an addendum to Sparks' clinical chart, Dr. Hicks notes the situation as follows: Although this addendum is dated August 7th, it was not signed by Dr. Hicks until August 10. In this case, the court held that Defendant had not been sufficiently involved in the victims murder to constitute being convicted as an accomplice in the act itself. A cause of action for abandonment by a physician has never been directly addressed by this Court. The district court granted the injunction and the police officers and prosecuting attorneys immediately sought review by the Supreme Court of the United States. 2d 1139 (2010) [2010 BL 188636]. In affirming, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the fact that Hicks's home is on tribe-owned reservation land is sufficient to support tribal jurisdiction over civil claims against nonmembers arising from their activities on that land. 9 Id. Defendant was present while co-defendant fatally shot another person and left the crime scene with co-defendant after the shooting. The Defendant, Hicks (Defendant), was jointly indicted with another man on one count of murder. Brief Fact Summary.' 4 May 2021 arms, finding she had a cervical disk herniation. remain innocent for the medical issues she faced after time. Judgment reversed. 8 terms. Dr. Bailey, the internist performing the medical consultation to see if surgery was safe, examined Sparks the following day, August 6th. Hicks believes that a surgery for. 3:17CV803, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext's comprehensive legal database . Hicks v. Sparks. :: 2013 :: Delaware Superior Court Decisions The Court reversed the judgment. This blockage was seen in a total occlusion of the right internal carotid artery and a fifty percent obstruction of the left internal carotid artery. Grant of summary judgement to Sparks affirmed. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. Sparks hit Hicks with her car-hicks complained of pain-settled for 4000 and signed a release . N13C . and it is within this court's discretion whether to apply the rule in a given case. Hicks v. United States | Case Brief for Law School | LexisNexis Sup. Betty J. Sparks, plaintiff below, appeals the summary judgment granted in favor of Defendants/Appellees, David Hicks, M.D., and Orthopedic Specialist of Tulsa, Inc. (OST), on her action for negligence and abandonment by Dr. Hicks. BMGT 380-6380. 150 U.S. 442,14 S. Ct. 144, 37 L. Ed. 649, 497 N.E.2d 827 (1986). On August 7th, when it came time for surgery, Dr. Hicks had not yet received Dr. Bailey's report. Moore v. Commonwealth, 771 S.W.2d 34, 38 (Ky. 1988), Derossett v. Commonwealth, 867 S.W.2d 195, 198 (Ky. 1993), Don't Miss Important Points of Law with BARBRI Outlines (Login Required). At trial, the Governments evidence demonstrated that although Defendant did not actually fire the shot that killed Rowe, he participated with Rowe in inducing the victim into the street where he was killed. -The court affirmed in favor of Timothy Hicks v. Sparks, 2014 Del. The attorney stated that he received a telephone call from Sparks on August 7th after she was discharged from the hospital. However, she stated to him that Dr. Hicks never discussed the problem with her. . v. Ball, 447 N.W.2d 676 (Iowa App. 2. Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 327, 107 S. Ct. 1149, 94 L. Ed. At trial, one of the men testified that, at this stop, Hicks got out of the car, went into a house and got a pistol. Skebba was convinced not to take the job by, Advanced Design Studio in Lighting (THET659), Introduction to Biology w/Laboratory: Organismal & Evolutionary Biology (BIOL 2200), Online Education Strategies (UNIV 1001 - AY2021-T), Ethics and Social Responsibility (PHIL 1404), Fundamental Human Form and Function (ES 207), Nursing B43 Nursing Care of the Medical Surgical (NURS B43), Managing Organizations and Leading People (C200 Task 1), Managing Organizations & Leading People (C200), Professional Application in Service Learning I (LDR-461), Advanced Anatomy & Physiology for Health Professions (NUR 4904), Principles Of Environmental Science (ENV 100), Operating Systems 2 (proctored course) (CS 3307), Comparative Programming Languages (CS 4402), Business Core Capstone: An Integrated Application (D083), CH 13 - Summary Maternity and Pediatric Nursing, Bates Test questions Children: Infancy Through Adolescence, Ch. Rather than appealing from that order, the employees filed suit in a federal district court against the police officers and prosecuting attorneys involved in the case, seeking an injunction against enforcement of the California obscenity statute and for return of the seized copies of the film, and a judgment declaring the statute unconstitutional. BLS BLS-111. product of fraud, duress, coercion, or mutual mistake. Is a person an accomplice to the crime of murder merely by his presence at the crime scene when the killing takes place, though he does not render assistance in completing the crime and there is no evidence of a prior agreement to render assistance? B-Law Cases. For the above and foregoing reasons, the opinion of the Court of Appeals is VACATED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Dr. Hicks scheduled Sparks' surgery for August 7th, and Sparks remained in the hospital until that date. 2d 347 (1987). This broad rule applies to both criminal and civil cases." Rule: The superior court therefore erred by granting motion for summary judgement. L201 test 4 Flashcards | Quizlet Reversed and remanded for a new trial. notes. The Supreme Court concluded that it had jurisdiction to hear the case because the injunctive order, issued by a federal court against state authorities, rested on federal constitutional grounds. Her requests for accommodation were not granted, with the chief suggesting that Hicks should patrol without a vest or patrol wearing a larger vest. 13 terms. In this case, was there both a mutual mistake? Hicks went to the local hospital's emergency room and followed up with her family physician a few days later with complaints of neck pain and headaches. Co. v. Progressive . The court held that the trial courts "retain wide latitude insofar as theConfrontation Clauseis concerned to impose reasonablelimits on such cross-examination based on concerns about, among other things, harassment, prejudice, confusion of the issues, the witness' safety, or interrogation that is repetitive or only marginally relevant." 2d 1261 (1999), Court of Appeals of Louisiana, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. In 2013 Hicks filed a lawsuit against Sparks of the above-referred-to Release. Issue: What question is the court answering, Wheat's had sewer problem claimed that past owners of the house deceived, Rule of Law: what is the specific law that is applicable to answer the question. Moore v. Commonwealth, 771 S.W.2d 34, 38 (Ky. 1988). Case brief- Hicks v. Sparks.docx. Sparks v. Hicks, 912 P.2d 331 | Casetext Search + Citator Native American tribes lack criminal jurisdiction over nonmembers. product of fraud, duress, coercion, or mutual mistake. When Sparks' son was informed that Dr. Hicks was not going to perform the surgery that day, he became angry and confronted one of Dr. Hicks' nurses, threatening to call Sparks' attorney. Respondent Hicks is a member of the Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribes of western Nevada and lives on the Tribes' reservation. Moreover, the unrefuted documentation indicates that Dr. Hicks gave the names of several doctors to Sparks who practiced in the relevant area of medicine and that he even contacted them for her. The policeexecuted a search warrant at Rogers' home, and found the gun, a loaded 9 mm Glock 17 handgun and an extra clip, hidden in Rogers' bathroom under some laundry. Don't Miss Important Points of Law with BARBRI Outlines (Login Required). at 234. 1983. BLAW #15 - Weekly case brief - Mia Martin Professor Chumney BLAW 280 4 Kansas City Kansas Community College. Defendant appealed judgment and the court reversed the judgment, set aside the verdict, awarded a new trial because the lower court's instructions to the jury were erroneous. Additionally, patrol officers were required to wear ballistic vests all day, which Hicks doctor did not recommend for her to wear. Gerald D. Swanson, Robert T. Rode, Tulsa, for Appellant. He admitted Garvey was jumped and tied up at his house. Appeal from the District Court of Tulsa County. Hicks later accepted an offer of $4000 in October but after . Anent the second issue, the court noted that constructive discharge claims were appropriate when an employer discriminated against an employee to the point such that his working conditions become so intolerable that a reasonable person in the employee's position would have felt compelled to resign. Dr. Hicks' records on Sparks reveal the following notation: On August 5th, Sparks was admitted to the hospital for the myelogram which confirmed the herniated disk diagnosis and the appropriateness of elective surgery. Taking all of these principles, the court held that the denial of accommodations for a breastfeeding employee violated the PDA when it amounted to a constructive discharge. 2007-SC-000751-MR, 2009 Ky. Unpub. He also admitted that he had the gun in his hand when Garvey got out of the trunk, as well as firing the gun when Garvey started running away. Defendant was convicted of murder. Name: Hicks v. Sparks The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's judgment on the grounds that the evidentiary materials were . Full title:Betty J. SPARKS, Appellant, v. David HICKS, M.D., and Orthopedic. The court found the lower court erred in failing to instruct the jury to consider whether defendant's words were intended to encourage the commission of the crime. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) amended Title VII to add that discrimination "because of sex" or "on the basis of . As they were escaping after the murder, Rowe was killed and Defendant was captured. There must be a previous agreement or conspiracy for Defendant to be found guilty of murder. Hicks resigned, and subsequently filed the present action against the Tuscaloosa Police Department, arguing that her reassignment from the narcotics task force to the patrol division was both a discriminatory violation of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) and retaliation in violation of the FMLA. Hicks v. Parks, Civil Action No. 3:17CV803 | Casetext Search + Citator ACalifornia superior court later ordered the two employees andthe theater to show cause why the film should not be declared obscene. Bob_Flandermanstein. Law School Case Brief; Hicks v. Commonwealth - No. Read the Court's full decision on FindLaw. Law School Case Brief; Hicks v. United States - 150 U.S. 442, 14 S. Ct. 144 (1893) Rule: Mere presence at the scene of a murder is not enough implicate someone as an accomplice, if there is no evidence that they had agreed to assist in the commission of the crime. A month later she filed a claim to Progressive Northern Insurance Co, Sparks liability carrier. Superior Court of The State of Delaware T. Henley Graves Sussex Cou Nty Contracts Consideration and Promissory Estoppel, Introduction to the LSAT 8 Week Prep Course, StudyBuddy Fall 2018 Exam Prep Workshops, 22 Ill.131 S. Ct. 51, 177 L. Ed. LEXIS 125 (Oct. 29, 2009) Rule: It is well-settled that "[t]he presentation of evidence as well as the scope and duration of cross-examination rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge. Hicks further argued that the chiefs proffered options--patrolling without a vest or patrolling with an ineffective larger vest--made work conditions so intolerable that any reasonable person would have been compelled to resign. The Court held that absent a clear showing that the owner could not have sought the return of the property in the state proceedings and seen to it that the federal claims were presented there, the district court should have dismissed the case. Issue. News ; Ask a Lawyer. This appeal followed with Hicks alleging error in: 1) the trial court denying him the right to confront a witness against him, 2) denying him an instruction on Second-Degree Assault, and 3) ordering his witness to show a tattoo to the jury during his testimony. The lower court's instruction that the testimony of witnesses standing one hundred yards away was truthful while the defendant's was false because he had an interest in the case improperly influenced the jury. The presence of another person at the scene of a murder who does not assist in carrying out the murder is not sufficient to implicate that person as an accomplice in the absence of evidence of a prior agreement to render assistance in the crime. 12 PC #1 Facts and Procedural History: When M.W. 2. Accordingly, given the trial court's power to limit the scope of cross-examination, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to permit Hicks to ask Garvey about whether his misdemeanor probationary status prevented him from using illegal drugs at the time that Hicks robbed, kidnapped, and shot him. B Law Briefs 14-17. After petitioner state game wardens executed state-court and tribal-court search warrants to search Hicks's home for evidence of an off-reservation crime, he filed suit in the Tribal Court against, inter alios, the wardens . Use this button to switch between dark and light mode. Pursuant to four separate warrants, the police seized four copies of an allegedly obscene film (Deep Throat) from a theater. 7 Id., at *3. Issue. The police then executed a search warrant at Hicks home and, although they did not find anything, Hicks confirmed that the gun was at Rogers' house. In this case, the court held that the evidence, taken in the light most favorable to Hicks, provided ample evidence that Hicks was both discriminated against on the basis of her pregnancy and that she was retaliated against for taking her FMLA leave. Facts. Post-Release injuries are materially, amounting to a mistake of fact, that she did not assume, litigation. Sparks requested a second opinion, and Harry E. Livingston, M.D., a partner with Dr. Hicks at OST, also concluded surgery would be appropriate. Synopsis of Rule of Law. It also lacked adjudicative authority to hear a claim that officers violated tribal law in the performance of their duties. Hicks v. Sparks. Feeling that the mutual trust necessary for him and his patient to proceed was destroyed by Sparks' sons actions, Dr. Hicks refused to treat Sparks further. Where nonmembers are concerned, the exercise of tribal power beyond what is necessary to protect tribal self-government or to control internal relations is inconsistent with the dependent status of the tribes, and so cannot survive without express congressional delegation. Subsequently, the superior court declared the film obscene and ordered all copies that might be found at the theater seized. As he got out, Garvey noticed they were in a wooded area, Hicks and Rogers were standing directly in front of him, and Hicks was holding the handgun and pointing it at Garvey's feet. Defendant was subsequently captured . Business Law Module 5.docx - Chapter 13: Reality of Hicks took twelve weeks of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) even though she was allowed only six weeks. Hicks was found guilty of 1) Kidnapping (with serious physical injury); 2) Second-Degree Robbery; and 3) First-Degree Assault, enhanced by a finding of Second-Degree Persistent Felony Offender ("PFO"). Business Law: Text and Cases (Kenneth W. Clarkson; Roger LeRoy Miller; Frank B. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the trial court. The district court concluded the bags did not lawfully come within Owens' plain view because Sparks "was arrested at the rear end of the truck" and Owens did not observe the bags until after Sparks' arrest. Case: Hicks Vs. Sparks In March 2011, 72-year-old Patricia Hicks was a passenger in a motor vehicle that was rear-ended by a car driven by Debra Sparks. Hicks v. United States | Case Brief for Law Students | Casebriefs Hicks prevailed at a jury trial, and the City now appealed the denial of its motion for judgment as a matter of law, its motion for a new trial, and the allegedly erroneous jury instructions. Hicks v. United States was an appeal on behalf of former Guantnamo detainee David Hicks asking the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review to overturn his conviction for "providing material support for terrorism," a charge that was invalidated in 2012 when the D.C. 1. Where an accomplice is present for the purpose of aiding and abetting in a murder but refrains from so aiding and abetting because it turned out not be necessary for the accomplishment of the crime, he can still be found guilty of the offense. Case brief- Hicks v. Sparks.docx - Hicks v. Sparks The mistake materially affects the agreed-upon exchange of performances and, 3. Issue: In this case, was there both a mutual mistake? Against sparks for negligence court granted summary The party adversely affected did not assume the risk of the mistake, A party assumes the risk of mistake where the contract assigns the risk to the party or where the, mistaken party consciously performed under a contract aware that of his or her limited. 1137,1893 U.S. Case opinion for MO Court of Appeals SPARKS v. SPARKS. summary judgement to Sparks affirmed. The general proposition is that the inherent sovereign powers of an Indian tribe do not extend to the activities of nonmembers of the tribe. Circuit ruled in Hamdan v.United States ("Hamdan II") that "material support" was not, and had never been, a crime . After tying him up, they took his cell phone, identification cards, and his $395.00, which he had not mentioned to anyone except Hicks. He admitted that he grabbed a belt and extension cord to tie up Garvey. Both parties were mistaken as to a basic assumption, 2. Prior to her FMLA leave, Hicks received a performance review saying that she exceeded expectations; however, on Hicks first day back from leave, she was written up. Did the Tribal court have jurisdiction over claims against state officials who entered tribal land to execute search warrant against tribal member suspected of violating state law outside reservation? Did the lower court err in failing to instruct the jury to consider whether defendant's words were intended to encourage the commission of the crime? This broad rule applies to both criminal and civil cases." Moore v. Ultimately, they ended up hanging out with other men. No. allybacon. The two men made plans to "hang out" that night. Dr. Livingston helped her schedule an appointment with Dr. Benner. Get Hicks v. Hicks, 733 So. SPCH 151-06. arms, finding she had a cervical disk herniation. Defendant was present at the time a person was murdered. negligence that caused the accident and the remaining surgeries. 2017) Rule: Employment discrimination, including discrimination on the basis of sex, is prohibited by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that lactation is a related medical condition to pregnancy and thus terminations based on a woman's need to breastfeed violate the PDA. Did the Supreme Court have jurisdiction to hear the case? Read Hicks v. Parks, Civil Action No. BLAW 280 42 U.S.C.S. Don't Miss Important Points of Law with BARBRI Outlines (Login Required). Synopsis of Rule of Law. Brief the cases beginning on page 1. Garvey eventually arrived at Albert and Jennifer Heckman's home where he got help. 48 terms. Brief Fact Summary. Dr. Hicks did not abandon Sparks at a critical moment. LEXIS 142 (Del. He noted that he would call Dr. Hicks with the results of his examination the next morning, August 7th. Get Hicks v. Bush, 180 N.E.2d 425 (1962), New York Court of Appeals, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. Wheat Trust v. Sparks- Case brief 6.docx. . Hicks opened up the trunk, said something about Garvey being untied, and ordered Garvey to get out.

Ratterman Brothers Funeral Home, Grammy Eligibility Period 2023, Camera Icon Does Not Appear In Notes, Articles H