Deck 6: Limitations in Seeking Relief

Question 1

For claim preclusion to apply, the parties cannot be in privity with the parties of the original suit.

Answer 1

False

Question 2

The res judicata doctrine would preclude the same case against the same defendant on the same claim.

Answer 2

True

Question 3

Whether a case has developed sufficiently to be before a court for adjudication raises a question of ripeness.

Answer 3

True

Question 4

Federal and state governments often enact legislation that waives sovereign immunity in specified types of cases and permits injured victims to file law suits.

Question 5

Congress has decided that the federal government cannot be sued in breach of contract cases.

Question 6

The fact that immunities exist is evidence that society recognizes the need to protect certain government officials from suit is more important to society than providing justice to a particular victim under certain circumstances.

Question 7

An action must be commenced and concluded within the time period established in the applicable statute of limitations or it will be dismissed.

Question 8

Standing is a necessary prerequisite to a court's proper exercise of subject matter jurisdiction.

Question 9

If the judicial branch determines that the executive or legislative branches have failed to act when needed, the political-question doctrine allows it to make a determination.

Question 10

A statute of limitations may not be used by a defendant as a defense against the plaintiff's claims.

Question 11

The case-or-controversy requirement generally precludes courts from rendering advisory opinions.

Question 12

Prosecutors enjoy immunity when they decide for the public who should be criminally prosecuted.

Question 13

Once the statute of limitations begins to run, it keeps running until it ends.

Question 14

Members of the military who have suffered service-related injuries due to government negligence are permitted to sue after leaving the military by the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Question 15

A case that is not ripe is nonjusticiable.

Question 16

Using the doctrine of laches may deny someone equitable relief.

Question 17

It is illegal for one contracting party to contractually agree not to sue another contracting party because such an agreement would contravene public policy.

Question 18

The time period set by the statute of limitations is outlined in most state constitutions.

Question 19

Juan, who is 15 years old, has been slightly injured as a result of a neighbor's negligence.Juan will be the person who has the legal right to decide whether to sue the neighbor.

Question 20

The U.S.Courts of Appeals are the only federal courts that can render advisory opinions.

Question 21

On July 1, 1993, the day of his tenth birthday, Juan lost the sight in his right eye because a soft drink exploded.The drink was bottled on December 23, 1992, and Juan's parents purchased it on July 1, 1993.Assume that in this state the statute of limitations for this type of action is two years and the age of majority is 18.Juan and his parents want to sue the bottler of the soft drink.The parents want money damages for the loss of Juan's services and medical bills.Juan wants damages for the loss of the sight of his eye and pain and suffering.When will the statute of limitations run under these circumstances?

A) December 23, 1994, for the parents and December 23, 2000, for Juan.
B) July 1, 1995, for both the parents and Juan.
C) December 23, 1994, for both the parents and Juan.
D) July 1, 1995, for the parents and July 1, 2001, for Juan.

Question 22

The requirement that a litigant bringing a court action must have a legally sufficient personal interest in the dispute in order to bring the complaint is known as

A) ripeness.
C) case or controversy.
B) standing.
D) mootness.

Question 23

The federal prosecutor is interested in having more defendants plead guilty.She has come up with a procedure to make plea requests more equitable and thus more appealing to the defendants.However, she is not sure that the process is completely legal.She sends a letter to the local Circuit Court requesting its opinion.How should the Circuit Court respond?

A) It should grant the request in an advisory opinion.
B) It should deny the request, as there is no case or controversy.
C) It could either grant or deny, depending on the potential impact of the procedure.
D) None of the above is correct.

Question 24

A brought suit against B in state court, saying that B had stolen an idea on which she had a patent.The court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction over patent law actions.One year later, before the statute of limitations had run out, A again brought suit, but in federal court.Which of the following is a true statement?

A) The suit should be dismissed on the basis of the principle of res judicata.
B) The question is moot, so the federal court will refuse to hear it.
C) The federal court can hear the case only if the state court was in error.
D) The case is ripe for the federal court to hear.

Question 25

A trespasses on B's land.Almost two years later, one day before the statute of limitations runs out on the trespass, B brings suit.The case will not come to trial for at least six months.Which of the following is true?

A) The cause of action accrued as soon as B filed the suit.
B) A may plead the statute of limitations as a defense.
C) When B commenced the suit, the statute of limitations was tolled.
D) A's statute-of-limitations defense depends on whether the statute contains a savings clause.

Question 26

The plaintiff brought a small claims action against the defendant for failing to maintain his premises in a safe condition and won a money judgment in the amount of $163.95.Five months later, the plaintiff brought a second lawsuit against the same defendant in district court alleging the same set of circumstances, but seeking more money.The defendant should make a motion to dismiss on what grounds?

A) The doctrine of bar and merger (res judicata) prohibits relitigation of the same cause of action between the same parties when a final judgment on the matter has been entered.
B) It should be dismissed because of double jeopardy under the Constitution.
C) The statute of limitations expired when the first judgment was entered.
D) The plaintiff lacks standing under the harmless error doctrine.

Question 27

If a court concludes that the plaintiff does not have a legally sufficient personal interest in a dispute, the court will dismiss the action because of

A) mootness.
C) lack of privity.
B) lack of ripeness.
D) standing.

Question 28

What legal doctrine(s) does a court use to determine whether a case is justiciable?

A) Ripeness
B) Standing
C) Res judicata
D) All of the above are correct.

Question 29

The American Postal Worker's Union brought suit to challenge the constitutionality of a U.S.Postal Service requirement that all applicants for employment must submit to drug tests.No union members were required to submit to a drug test as a condition of continued employment, nor were any applicants, by definition, members of the union, since none had been hired yet.The Postal Service should move to dismiss the case on what grounds?

A) Mootness
C) Standing
B) Ripeness
D) Political question doctrine

Question 30

The basis of the political-question doctrine is

A) the natural law concept of fairness.
B) the constitutional separation of powers.
C) both fairness and separation of powers.
D) None of the above is correct.

Question 31

On June 10, 1993, Fireman Bob ran into Ruby's burning house and found her lying in a hallway, overcome by smoke.He picked her up and carried her out to safety.Unfortunately, in his haste Bob was not careful.Ruby's ankle struck a doorway and was broken in several places.This required extensive surgery, so that Ruby was in the hospital for several weeks.On July 1, 1993, Fireman Bob went to visit her in the hospital.While he was talking to her, he accidentally bumped the intravenous needle in her hand, causing her hand to bleed.Infection subsequently developed.The statute of limitations for acts of negligence is two years.On June 18, 1995, Ruby filed suit against both the city fire department, for injury to her ankle, and Fireman Bob, for injury to her ankle and for causing the infection in her hand.Which of the following statements is false?

A) The sovereign immunity defense would likely relieve the city of liability for Ruby's broken ankle as the provision of fire protection is governmental in nature.
B) Unless there is some sort of savings clause, Ruby's suit against the city for her broken ankle is barred because the statute of limitations has already run.
C) The doctrine of immunity for government officials, as well as the statute of limitations, would likely bar Ruby's suit against Fireman Bob for her broken ankle.
D) The doctrine of immunity for government officials, as well as the statute of limitations, would likely bar Ruby's suit against Fireman Bob for causing the infection in her hand.

Question 32

The rationale behind claim preclusion is that

A) hardship is prevented because a litigant can't be sued several times.
B) litigation is reduced.
C) parties have only one chance to win, so they make their best effort.
D) All of the above are correct.

Question 33

In many states, if the executive or legislative branches have a legal question, they should ask

A) the State Supreme Court.
B) the U.S.Supreme Court.
C) the State Attorney General.
D) their own private counsel.

Question 34

An advisory opinion

A) is given when there is no case or controversy.
B) is permitted by the constitution of some states.
C) does not have the effect of a judicial opinion.
D) All of the above are correct.

Question 35

Once the statute of limitations has run

A) the defendant may plead the statute as a defense.
B) the defendant loses the cloak of immunity.
C) the plaintiff must prove an identity of parties and an identity of issues.
D) None of the above is correct.

Question 36

Mohammed had a 5 year contract with the local grocery store to deliver specially prepared meats.Mohammed heard the store was having financial trouble and he was worried the store might breach the contract.Mohammed went to his attorney, wanting to sue the store.What should the attorney advise?

A) He should wait; the case is not yet ripe.
B) He can't sue because he does not have standing.
C) He should sue immediately, before the statute of limitations runs out.
D) None of the above is correct.

Question 37

A case is ripe when

A) all parties agree regarding the proper forum for the case.
B) a case has developed enough for the parties to have distinct, adverse positions.
C) discovery has concluded thus clarifying the facts.
D) All of these answers are correct.

Question 38

Peter filed a suit against St.Paul Church.Before trial the church offered Peter $10,000 to settle the claim outside of court.Peter accepted the money.Peter and the church agreed that the trial should take place even though neither would consider the results binding.Peter wants to find out if he would have won and what amount of damages the jury would have come up with.The church wants the court to define the limits of charitable immunity.What should the court do under these circumstances?

A) Dismiss the case as being moot because the parties settled.
B) Issue an advisory opinion to set a precedent on the doctrine of charitable immunity.
C) Rule on charitable immunity as it is a case or controversy and the parties have standing.
D) Grant a JNOV because the case is ripe.

Question 39

Which of the following disputes should an American court decline to hear on the basis of the act of state doctrine?

A) A foreign dictator confiscates a warehouse containing merchandise belonging to an American corporation, which is located in the territory of the foreign sovereign.The American corporation wants to challenge, in an American court, the right of the dictator to seize the property in his country.
B) A Florida woman unknowingly marries a Cuban spy, an agent of the Cuban government who was sent to infiltrate the Miami Cuban community in order to obtain information concerning Brothers to the Rescue, a group that aids people trying to escape from Cuba.She alleges that her relationship with the spy was nonconsensual as she did not know of his surreptitious directions from the Cuban government to marry her just to obtain information.She wishes to seek damages from Cuba in an American court.
C) An agent of the intelligence branch of the Libyan government was responsible for a terrorist act that injured Americans.The act that caused the damages did not occur in Libya.The Americans wish to sue Libya in an American court for their injuries.
D) None of the above is correct.

Question 40

Former Iranian hostages and two of their wives filed suit against the United States seeking compensation because the Algiers Accord, the agreement made between the president and Iran that secured their release, deprived them of the right to sue Iran for injuries sustained while being held hostage.The federal appeals court determined that the case involved a policy decision made during a crisis situation by the president and was not subject to judicial review.The court should refuse to adjudicate this dispute based on

A) the political-question doctrine.
C) ripeness.
B) mootness.
D) standing.

Question 41

In the Federal Tort Claims Act,

A) the federal government codified the common law rule of sovereign immunity.
B) the federal government waived its immunity from tort claims.
C) the federal government shifted the burden of proof from the plaintiff to itself, as the government generally has greater resources than individuals.
D) None of the above is correct.

Question 42

State U's basketball coach will be able to file suit against a basketball official for not having called an obvious intentional foul at the end of a basketball game that State U lost by one point.The consequences to State U of this loss included not making the NCAA field of 64 and the loss of significant financial rewards and recruiting advantages that result from qualifying for the tournament.Can State U sue the officials? Explain your answer thoroughly.

Question 43

On July 1, 1993, the day of his tenth birthday, Juan lost the sight in his right eye because a soft drink bottle exploded.The drink was bottled on December 23, 1992, and Juan's parents purchased it on July 1, 1993.Assume that in this state the statute of limitations for this type of action is two years and the age of majority is 18.Juan and his parents want to sue the bottler of the soft drink.The parents want money damages for the loss of Juan's services and medical bills.Juan wants damages for the loss of the sight of his eye and pain and suffering.When will the statute of limitations run under these circumstances? Explain thoroughly.

Question 44

Where the parties are of one interest and seek the same relief the case is

A) res judicata.
C) proprietary.
B) collateral.
D) moot.

Question 45

Immunities exist because

A) some people are too important to be sued.
B) sometimes there is a greater public good than the right to sue.
C) traditionally disadvantaged people deserve relief from the courts.
D) All of the above are correct.

Question 46

Spousal immunity

A) is based on the idea that husbands and wives are legally the same person.
B) is only recognized in some states.
C) may not stand if the couple is engaged in fraud or collusion.
D) All of the above are correct

Question 47

Explain the case-or-controversy requirement and give an example.

Question 48

Ruby sues Bob for breach of contract.In which of the following cases would res judicata not bar her subsequent suit against Bob?

A) She sues him for breach of a different contract.
B) She sues him for more money than she sought in her first suit arising from the same contract breach.
C) She sues him in federal court instead of state court as she did in her first suit arising from the same contract breach.
D) She sues him in a different state than she did in her first suit arising from the same contract breach.