Deck 3: The US Legal System

Question 1

Subject-matter jurisdiction is a court's power to hear certain kinds of cases.

Answer 1

True

Question 2

A defendant who believes that he or she has a claim against the plaintiff would include a counterclaim with the answer.

Answer 2

True

Question 3

Intermediate courts of appeal in the state court system exist in all states.

Answer 3

False

Question 4

State courts have the power to hear all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal court system.

Question 5

Usually the issue of ripeness arises when one party claims that a case is moot.

Question 6

The word "jurisdiction" comes from the Latin terms juris, meaning "law," and diction, meaning "to speak."

Question 7

Peremptory challenges in jury selection may not be racially based.

Question 8

In some cases, the U.S. Supreme Court functions as a trial court of limited jurisdiction.

Question 9

Concurrent federal jurisdiction means that both state and federal courts have jurisdiction over a case.

Question 10

A party only has a limited number of challenges for cause in jury selection.

Question 11

A reply is an answer to a counterclaim.

Question 12

Under our system of justice, courts may issue advisory opinions.

Question 13

In rem jurisdiction references jurisdiction over a person.

Question 14

Because of its complicated nature, any complaint should be at least three pages long.

Question 15

A person who has the legal right to bring an action in court has standing.

Question 16

Under federal statutory law, Internet transactions cannot be the basis for a finding of in personam jurisdiction.

Question 17

In most civil cases, a plaintiff must prove her case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Question 18

The defendant responds to a complaint with an answer.

Question 19

Juries decide questions of law.

Question 20

Once a case is in the proper court system, venue determines which trial court in the system will hear the case.

Question 21

Which of the following do appellate courts primarily handle?

A) Questions of law
B) Questions of fact
C) Questions of law and fact
D) Cases when they initially enter the legal system
E) Questions of law and fact, and also cases when they initially enter the legal system

Question 22

Only one party may appeal from a final judgment.

Question 23

Which of the following is needed for diversity-of-citizenship?

A) Only that the plaintiff not reside in the same state as the defendant.
B) Only that the plaintiff reside in the same state as the defendant.
C) Only that the controversy concern an amount in excess of $75,000.
D) Only that the controversy concern an amount in excess of $100,000.
E) That the plaintiff and the defendant reside in different states and that the controversy concerns an amount in excess of $75,000.

Question 24

Which of the following is a question of fact?

A) Did the vehicle run the traffic light?
B) Is premeditation necessary for a first degree murder conviction?
C) Is speech protected by the First Amendment?
D) What is necessary for service of process?
E) What elements should an answer contain?

Question 25

Mike, a resident of Georgia, sues Company A in state court in Georgia for negligence alleging personal injury and property damage of $100,000 after a truck driven by an employee of Company A strikes his pick-up truck in the rear. Company A is incorporated in Delaware, has its headquarters in New York, but does a substantial amount of business in Georgia. Company A seeks removal to federal district court, but Mike opposes the motion. Which of the following is true regarding whether the case may be properly removed to federal district court?

A) The amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and if Company A's nerve center is in a state other than Georgia, then the case may be properly removed to federal court.
B) The amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and because Company A is incorporated and has its headquarters in a state other than Georgia, the case may be properly removed to federal court.
C) Because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and Company A is incorporated in a state other than Georgia, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where Company A's headquarters, nerve center, or principal place of business is located.
D) Because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and Company A is headquartered in a state other than Georgia, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where Company A is incorporated and regardless of the location of its nerve center.
E) Because the amount in controversy fails to satisfy jurisdictional requirements, regardless of the location of Company A, the case may not be removed to federal court.

Question 26

Assume a plaintiff files a case in state court that could also have been filed in federal court. Does the defendant have any choice in the matter?

A) The defendant has a right to move the case to federal court.
B) The defendant can have the case moved to federal court only if federal jurisdiction question is involved.
C) The defendant can have the case moved to federal court only if the state trial court judge grants permission in his or her discretion.
D) The defendant can have the case moved to federal court only if the plaintiff's filing expenses in state court are paid by the defendant.
E) The defendant has no choice, and the case will stay in state court.

Question 27

Laws which enable the court to serve a defendant outside the state as long as the defendant has sufficient minimum contacts within the state and it seems fair to assert jurisdiction are called ______.

A) Minimum contact statutes
B) Significant contact statutes
C) Long-arm statutes
D) In rem statutes
E) Quasi In rem statutes

Question 28

Over which of the following does the federal court system have exclusive jurisdiction?

A) Admiralty cases only
B) Bankruptcy cases only
C) Federal copyright cases only
D) Admiralty, bankruptcy, and federal copyright cases
E) The federal court system has no exclusive jurisdiction

Question 29

Which of the following is a court's power to hear certain kinds of cases?

A) Subject-matter jurisdiction
B) In kind jurisdiction
C) In personam jurisdiction
D) In loco jurisdiction
E) In area jurisdiction

Question 30

Which of the following is true regarding federal jurisdiction?

A) There is no exclusive federal jurisdiction in civil matters.
B) If a case falls within the federal jurisdiction, it may not fall within state jurisdiction.
C) Some cases fall within both federal jurisdiction and state jurisdiction, but there is no exclusive federal court jurisdiction.
D) Some cases fall within both federal jurisdiction and state jurisdiction, but that only occurs in criminal matters.
E) Some cases fall within both federal jurisdiction and state jurisdiction, but the federal court system has exclusive jurisdiction over some cases.

Question 31

Which of the following is true regarding state and federal court jurisdiction?

A) State courts begin with exclusive jurisdiction until a federal court intervenes.
B) In all cases, state courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the federal courts.
C) Federal courts begin with exclusive jurisdiction until a state court intervenes.
D) In all cases, state courts have exclusive jurisdiction unless the state's Supreme Court grants jurisdiction to a federal court in the state.
E) In some cases, state courts have exclusive jurisdiction; in some cases, state courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the federal courts; and state courts also have the power to hear all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal court system.

Question 32

Ann, a Massachusetts resident, breached a contract entered into in Florida with Bruce. Bruce successfully obtains a judgment against Ann for $150,000 in a Florida state court. Ann lives in a nice apartment in Massachusetts, and her only substantial asset is a vacation beach house in North Carolina. Which of the following is true regarding Bruce's ability to obtain funds from a sale of the beach house?

A) Bruce is only entitled to obtain funds from property located in Florida, the location of the lawsuit, and cannot benefit from the property in North Carolina.
B) Bruce is only entitled to obtain funds from property located in Florida, the location of the lawsuit, or from Massachusetts, Ann's domicile, and cannot benefit from the property in North Carolina.
C) Bruce will be able to sell the beach house in North Carolina through attachment jurisdiction, and he is entitled to keep any funds obtained in excess of amounts owed.
D) Bruce will be able to sell the beach house in North Carolina through attachment jurisdiction, but he must return to Ann any funds obtained in excess of amounts owed.
E) Under federal law, Bruce will only be able to sell the beach house through attachment jurisdiction if after two years Ann has failed to satisfy the judgment, and any sums received in excess of amounts owed to Bruce go the Federal Housing Administration.

Question 33

If an appellate judge agrees with the majority's decision, but for different reasons, the judge may write a "concurring" opinion.

Question 34

Which of the following is the same as attachment jurisdiction?

A) In rem jurisdiction
B) Personal jurisdiction
C) Subject-matter jurisdiction
D) Equitable jurisdiction
E) Quasi In rem jurisdiction

Question 35

Paul lives in Florida but owns property in Tennessee for which he has not paid property tax in several years. Assuming the state meets procedural requirements, which of the following is true?

A) The court can exert in personam jurisdiction over the property itself and sell it to satisfy the tax debt.
B) The court can exert in rem jurisdiction over the property and sell it to satisfy the tax debt.
C) The court can exert both in personam jurisdiction and in rem jurisdiction over Paul but must wait until his return to the state in order to sell the property to satisfy the tax debt.
D) The court can exert both in personam jurisdiction and in rem jurisdiction over the property itself and may take control of the property, but the court must wait until Paul's return to the state in order to sell the property to satisfy the tax debt.
E) The court has no right to sell the property to satisfy the tax debt because no jurisdiction is present.

Question 36

For purposes of diversity-of-citizenship, where does a corporation reside?

A) The state of incorporation only.
B) Only the state in which the corporation has its principal place of business.
C) The state in which the corporation has its principal place of business and the state of incorporation.
D) Any state in which the corporation does business.
E) Any state in which the corporation has done business within the last five years.

Question 37

Doctor Sally was sued for malpractice based on allegedly removing the wrong body part. Following discovery, it becomes clear that the plaintiff has no credible evidence against Doctor Sally and that no reasonable jury could rule in the plaintiff's favor. How should Sally's lawyer proceed?

A) The lawyer should make a motion for summary judgment.
B) The lawyer should make a motion for additional discovery.
C) The lawyer should make a motion to amend the answer in order to make a motion to dismiss.
D) The lawyer should file a motion for judgment on the pleadings.
E) The lawyer should proceed to trial.

Question 38

Will a plaintiff be allowed to assert jurisdiction over a defendant in the plaintiff's state for a cause of action arising out of the defendant's website?

A) It depends on the nature and quality of commercial activity that an entity conducts over the Internet.
B) Yes, for any type of action.
C) Yes, but only if the defendant consented to jurisdiction in the plaintiff's home state.
D) Yes, but only if the defendant has actually physically been in the plaintiff's home state within the 180 days prior to the filing of the complaint.
E) No, not under any circumstances.

Question 39

Which of the following is true regarding the use of peremptory challenges based on gender?

A) Peremptory challenges may not be based on gender unless a sexually based crime, such as rape, is involved.
B) Only one peremptory challenge per party may be based on gender.
C) Peremptory challenges may be based on gender only so long as lawyers for all parties agree.
D) Peremptory challenges may be based on gender.
E) Peremptory challenges may not be based on gender.

Question 40

On average, the U.S. Supreme Court hears 300 cases a year.

Question 41

"Revenge." Jane, a first year law student, while walking to school in inclement weather, accidentally slipped on ice knocking down Greg, another first year law student, breaking his glasses. He was very angry with Jane and let the air out of one of her car tires. Greg also decided to sue Jane for negligence claiming as damages $300 for his broken glasses. He decided that he already knew all about the law and did not need a lawyer. Greg sued Jane in state court. Jane, in the same lawsuit, brought an action against Greg for letting the air out of her tire. At the trial in state court, Jane told the judge that a friend, Susie, told her that she saw Greg let the air out of Jane's tire. The judge disallowed Jane's testimony on that issue. Susie, however, who was in the courtroom also came and testified to that effect. The state court judge ruled in favor of Jane. Greg said that he was not giving up and that he would seek double damages on appeal in federal court. Jane and Greg live in different states when not attending school. After the trial, Jane reported Greg's action of letting the air out of her tire to the police who said that they would proceed with a criminal action against Greg. Greg goes to see Alex, a recent graduate who had just passed the bar, and asked Alex to represent him in a federal court appeal.

-Jane's action against Greg for the tire is called a ______.

A) Counterclaim
B) Cross-Claim
C) Third-party claim
D) Discovery claim
E) Service claim

Question 42

What are the trial courts in the federal court system called?

A) U.S. district courts
B) U.S. circuit courts
C) Federal circuit courts
D) Federal jurisdictional courts
E) Preemptory courts

Question 43

A[n] ______ is a judgment in favor of the plaintiff that occurs when the defendant fails to answer the complaint, and the plaintiff's complaint alleges facts that would support such a judgment.

A) Default judgment
B) Automatic judgment
C) Delineated response judgment
D) Dismissal
E) Pleading judgment

Question 44

Bob sued Jane over a motor vehicle accident. Bob and Jane settled the case prior to the trial for $1,000. The lawsuit is now ______.

A) Ripe
B) Moot
C) Cased
D) Standard
E) Remanded

Question 45

Billy knows that he can bring his case against Bob in a state court in Tennessee. He is unsure, however, of which county in which to proceed. Which of the following address the proper county?

A) In personam jurisdiction
B) Venue
C) Subject-matter jurisdiction
D) Diversity jurisdiction
E) Long-arm jurisdiction

Question 46

"Revenge." Jane, a first year law student, while walking to school in inclement weather, accidentally slipped on ice knocking down Greg, another first year law student, breaking his glasses. He was very angry with Jane and let the air out of one of her car tires. Greg also decided to sue Jane for negligence claiming as damages $300 for his broken glasses. He decided that he already knew all about the law and did not need a lawyer. Greg sued Jane in state court. Jane, in the same lawsuit, brought an action against Greg for letting the air out of her tire. At the trial in state court, Jane told the judge that a friend, Susie, told her that she saw Greg let the air out of Jane's tire. The judge disallowed Jane's testimony on that issue. Susie, however, who was in the courtroom also came and testified to that effect. The state court judge ruled in favor of Jane. Greg said that he was not giving up and that he would seek double damages on appeal in federal court. Jane and Greg live in different states when not attending school. After the trial, Jane reported Greg's action of letting the air out of her tire to the police who said that they would proceed with a criminal action against Greg. Greg goes to see Alex, a recent graduate who had just passed the bar, and asked Alex to represent him in a federal court appeal.

-What standard of proof would the trial judge have applied when ruling on the case?

A) A preponderance of the evidence standard
B) A standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt
C) A standard of proof by a margin
D) A standard of certainty in proof
E) A standard of proof beyond a reasonable question

Question 47

Which of the following is true regarding state courts of appeal?

A) States only have an intermediate court of appeal if there is no state Supreme Court.
B) In states that do not have an intermediate court of appeal, appeals go to the federal court of appeals.
C) In states that do not have an intermediate court of appeal, there is no right of appeal to any court.
D) All states in this country have intermediate courts of appeal.
E) Not all states have intermediate courts of appeal; in those states, appeals go to the state court of last resort.

Question 48

"Appellate Court." Jim, who is a bit eccentric, says that he is fed up with the way a certain employer in his town treats employees and that he is going to sue on behalf of all those employees. Jim also says that he is going to start his case at the appellate court level, skipping over all those "lesser" judges. Jim says that those justices will surely hear him out and that he will also seek a jury.

-Will an appellate court hear Jim's case?

A) Yes, so long as a state trial court judge approves and certifies the case for the appellate court without holding a trial first.
B) Yes, but only if Jim can prove that he would have had to wait at least a year for a trial at the trial court level.
C) Yes, but only if Jim files his case in state court as opposed to federal court.
D) Yes, but Jim is not entitled to a jury.
E) No, because Jim is required to first file the case in the appropriate trial court.

Question 49

The ______ requirement ensures that courts do not render advisory opinions.

A) Attachment
B) Subject-matter jurisdiction
C) Case or controversy
D) In rem
E) In personam

Question 50

Yolanda found a better job and quit Robert's employment. Yolanda, however, wants to sue Robert because she believes that he may have terminated her employment in the future based on age discrimination. At this point, which of the following would be Robert's best defense to a lawsuit filed by Yolanda in the state in which she worked?

A) That Yolanda lacks standing.
B) That the court lacks in personam jurisdiction.
C) That the state's long-arm statute does not apply.
D) That a default judgment is appropriate.
E) That the case is moot.

Question 51

"Appellate Court." Jim, who is a bit eccentric, says that he is fed up with the way a certain employer in his town treats employees and that he is going to sue on behalf of all those employees. Jim also says that he is going to start his case at the appellate court level, skipping over all those "lesser" judges. Jim says that those justices will surely hear him out and that he will also seek a jury.

-Assuming Jim ends up initially, or at some later point, at the appellate level, is he entitled to a jury at the appellate level?

A) No, jurors are not used at the appellate court level.
B) Yes, but only if he had a jury first at the trial court level.
C) Yes, if he satisfies the requirements to initially bring the case in appellate court, he is entitled to a jury.
D) Yes, but only if the employer agrees to a jury.
E) Yes, because appellate courts decide questions of fact while questions of law are decided at the trial court level.

Question 52

"Revenge." Jane, a first year law student, while walking to school in inclement weather, accidentally slipped on ice knocking down Greg, another first year law student, breaking his glasses. He was very angry with Jane and let the air out of one of her car tires. Greg also decided to sue Jane for negligence claiming as damages $300 for his broken glasses. He decided that he already knew all about the law and did not need a lawyer. Greg sued Jane in state court. Jane, in the same lawsuit, brought an action against Greg for letting the air out of her tire. At the trial in state court, Jane told the judge that a friend, Susie, told her that she saw Greg let the air out of Jane's tire. The judge disallowed Jane's testimony on that issue. Susie, however, who was in the courtroom also came and testified to that effect. The state court judge ruled in favor of Jane. Greg said that he was not giving up and that he would seek double damages on appeal in federal court. Jane and Greg live in different states when not attending school. After the trial, Jane reported Greg's action of letting the air out of her tire to the police who said that they would proceed with a criminal action against Greg. Greg goes to see Alex, a recent graduate who had just passed the bar, and asked Alex to represent him in a federal court appeal.

-Was the judge correct in disallowing Jane's testimony regarding what Susie told her about the tire?

A) No, the judge was wrong and should have considered that testimony.
B) Yes, the judge was correct to disallow the testimony because it involved a possible criminal action.
C) Yes, the judge was correct to disallow the testimony because it was hearsay.
D) Yes, the judge was correct to disallow the testimony but only because Susie was in the courtroom and could testify herself; otherwise, it should have been allowed.
E) Yes, the judge was correct to disallow the testimony but only because it purportedly came from an admitted friend of the defendant, not an independent witness; otherwise, it should have been allowed.

Question 53

"Revenge." Jane, a first year law student, while walking to school in inclement weather, accidentally slipped on ice knocking down Greg, another first year law student, breaking his glasses. He was very angry with Jane and let the air out of one of her car tires. Greg also decided to sue Jane for negligence claiming as damages $300 for his broken glasses. He decided that he already knew all about the law and did not need a lawyer. Greg sued Jane in state court. Jane, in the same lawsuit, brought an action against Greg for letting the air out of her tire. At the trial in state court, Jane told the judge that a friend, Susie, told her that she saw Greg let the air out of Jane's tire. The judge disallowed Jane's testimony on that issue. Susie, however, who was in the courtroom also came and testified to that effect. The state court judge ruled in favor of Jane. Greg said that he was not giving up and that he would seek double damages on appeal in federal court. Jane and Greg live in different states when not attending school. After the trial, Jane reported Greg's action of letting the air out of her tire to the police who said that they would proceed with a criminal action against Greg. Greg goes to see Alex, a recent graduate who had just passed the bar, and asked Alex to represent him in a federal court appeal.

-What standard of proof would the judge apply in a criminal action against Greg?

A) A preponderance of the evidence standard
B) A standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt
C) A standard of proof by a margin
D) A standard of certainty in proof
E) A standard of proof beyond a reasonable question

Question 54

Assuming there are no vacancies, how many U.S. Supreme Court justices are there?

A) 9
B) 5
C) 15
D) 8
E) 7

Question 55

"Appellate Court." Jim, who is a bit eccentric, says that he is fed up with the way a certain employer in his town treats employees and that he is going to sue on behalf of all those employees. Jim also says that he is going to start his case at the appellate court level, skipping over all those "lesser" judges. Jim says that those justices will surely hear him out and that he will also seek a jury.

-Regardless of what court is involved, can Jim act as plaintiff for the employees?

A) Yes, so long as he gets permission slips from all of them.
B) Yes, so long as no employee files an objection.
C) Yes, so long as he gives any money he receives to them.
D) No, because he lacks standing.
E) No, because venue is lacking.

Question 56

Which of the following is typically an appropriate venue in a lawsuit?

A) Only the trial court where the defendant resides.
B) Only the trial court where the plaintiff resides.
C) Only the location where the dispute occurred if the lawsuit focuses on a particular incident.
D) Both the trial court where the defendant resides and the trial court where the plaintiff resides.
E) The trial court where the defendant resides and also the location where the dispute occurred if the lawsuit focuses on a particular incident.

Question 57

How many circuits does the U.S. Court of Appeals have?

A) 6
B) 50
C) 12
D) 10
E) 13

Question 58

Which of the following is true regarding trials in Japan?

A) The Japanese trial system has juries that function similar to juries in America.
B) The discovery process in the Japanese court system is much simpler than that in America.
C) Trial involves a series of discrete meetings between the parties and the judge.
D) Known evidence must be automatically exchanged without request or order of the court.
E) Only civil penalties may be imposed in civil cases for parties violating judicial orders.

Question 59

Which of the following is true regarding the court system in the Republic of China (Taiwan)?

A) It is identical to the court system in the U.S.
B) For civil and criminal cases, and for cases interpreting the country's constitution, the Supreme Court is the court of last resort.
C) All cases go directly from the trial court to the Supreme Court, and there is no intermediate appellate court system.
D) While constitutional issues are heard by the country's Supreme Court, regular civil and criminal cases are heard by the Court of the Judicial Yuan.
E) Responsibility for interpreting the country's constitution falls to the Constitutional Court of the Judicial Yuan.

Question 60

"Revenge." Jane, a first year law student, while walking to school in inclement weather, accidentally slipped on ice knocking down Greg, another first year law student, breaking his glasses. He was very angry with Jane and let the air out of one of her car tires. Greg also decided to sue Jane for negligence claiming as damages $300 for his broken glasses. He decided that he already knew all about the law and did not need a lawyer. Greg sued Jane in state court. Jane, in the same lawsuit, brought an action against Greg for letting the air out of her tire. At the trial in state court, Jane told the judge that a friend, Susie, told her that she saw Greg let the air out of Jane's tire. The judge disallowed Jane's testimony on that issue. Susie, however, who was in the courtroom also came and testified to that effect. The state court judge ruled in favor of Jane. Greg said that he was not giving up and that he would seek double damages on appeal in federal court. Jane and Greg live in different states when not attending school. After the trial, Jane reported Greg's action of letting the air out of her tire to the police who said that they would proceed with a criminal action against Greg. Greg goes to see Alex, a recent graduate who had just passed the bar, and asked Alex to represent him in a federal court appeal.

-What advice should Alex give to Greg regarding an appeal filed in federal court?

A) He should tell Greg that a federal appeal looks promising and that he will be glad to represent Greg for an hourly rate of $400.
B) He should tell Greg that the federal appeal looks good only if Greg can get Jane to admit she was negligent.
C) He should tell Greg that the federal appeal looks good only if Susie does not come to testify in person.
D) He should tell Greg that the federal appeal is not possible unless Greg first gets the trial court judge to certify the case to federal court.
E) He should tell Greg to forget about a federal court appeal because an appeal from a state trial court would not be to federal court.

Question 61

"Puppy Woes." Sam promised to sell Linda a Welsh Corgi puppy for $700 but backed out of the deal. Linda sued Sam in state court for breach of contract and asked for a jury to hear the case. During jury selection, one juror, Ann, said that she did not think she could be fair to Linda because Linda did not appear to be a dog lover. Linda's lawyer asked that Ann not hear the case on the basis that she could not be fair, and the judge excused Ann. Linda also decided that another juror, Sandy, looked at her in a grumpy manner so, without a reason given, Linda's lawyer asked the judge to excuse that juror from serving. The judge did so. After the jury was chosen, Linda's lawyer made a statement to the jury as did Sam's lawyer. Linda's lawyer then called to the witness stand Brenda, a friend of Linda, who heard the discussion held between Linda and Sam regarding the purchase of the puppy. Brenda testified under questioning by Linda's lawyer that she heard Linda say that she would pay $700 for the puppy and that she also heard Sam say that he would sell the dog for that amount. Unfortunately for Linda, Brenda also testified in response to questioning by Sam's lawyer that Sam distinctly told Linda that he would only sell the puppy to her if Linda came with cash for the puppy within seven days. Linda did not show up with the money for ten days and Sam had already sold the dog to someone else. The judge ruled in favor of Sam.

-The statements made to the jury by the lawyers immediately after the jury was chosen are referred to as ______.

A) Direct statements
B) Closing selection statements
C) Jury statements
D) Influential statements
E) Opening statements

Question 62

The court may grant a ______ if after reviewing the evidence in the case, there is no factual dispute and one party is entitled to judgment prior to trial.

A) Motion for judgment on the pleadings
B) Motion for summary judgment
C) Motion for sanctions
D) Motion for discovery
E) Motion for production

Question 63

Discuss the items that should appear in a complaint.

Question 64

The court may grant a ______ if after reviewing the pleadings, the judge determines that the only reasonable decision is in favor of the moving party.

A) Motion for judgment on the pleadings
B) Motion for summary judgment
C) Motion for sanctions
D) Motion for discovery
E) Motion for production

Question 65

Billy, a witness to a motor vehicle accident, is gravely ill with cancer. Pat, who was injured in the accident, would like to preserve his testimony for trial in case he dies before the trial date. What should Pat do?

A) Send interrogatories to Billy.
B) Take Billy's deposition.
C) Send a request to admit to Billy that the accident was the defendant's fault.
D) Have a conference with the judge and Billy.
E) There is nothing she can do.

Question 66

"Puppy Woes." Sam promised to sell Linda a Welsh Corgi puppy for $700 but backed out of the deal. Linda sued Sam in state court for breach of contract and asked for a jury to hear the case. During jury selection, one juror, Ann, said that she did not think she could be fair to Linda because Linda did not appear to be a dog lover. Linda's lawyer asked that Ann not hear the case on the basis that she could not be fair, and the judge excused Ann. Linda also decided that another juror, Sandy, looked at her in a grumpy manner so, without a reason given, Linda's lawyer asked the judge to excuse that juror from serving. The judge did so. After the jury was chosen, Linda's lawyer made a statement to the jury as did Sam's lawyer. Linda's lawyer then called to the witness stand Brenda, a friend of Linda, who heard the discussion held between Linda and Sam regarding the purchase of the puppy. Brenda testified under questioning by Linda's lawyer that she heard Linda say that she would pay $700 for the puppy and that she also heard Sam say that he would sell the dog for that amount. Unfortunately for Linda, Brenda also testified in response to questioning by Sam's lawyer that Sam distinctly told Linda that he would only sell the puppy to her if Linda came with cash for the puppy within seven days. Linda did not show up with the money for ten days and Sam had already sold the dog to someone else. The judge ruled in favor of Sam.

-The challenge to the juror who seemed grumpy is referred to as a[n] _______.

A) Peremptory challenge
B) Challenge for cause
C) Stipulated challenge
D) Fairness challenge
E) Approved challenge

Question 67

"Puppy Woes." Sam promised to sell Linda a Welsh Corgi puppy for $700 but backed out of the deal. Linda sued Sam in state court for breach of contract and asked for a jury to hear the case. During jury selection, one juror, Ann, said that she did not think she could be fair to Linda because Linda did not appear to be a dog lover. Linda's lawyer asked that Ann not hear the case on the basis that she could not be fair, and the judge excused Ann. Linda also decided that another juror, Sandy, looked at her in a grumpy manner so, without a reason given, Linda's lawyer asked the judge to excuse that juror from serving. The judge did so. After the jury was chosen, Linda's lawyer made a statement to the jury as did Sam's lawyer. Linda's lawyer then called to the witness stand Brenda, a friend of Linda, who heard the discussion held between Linda and Sam regarding the purchase of the puppy. Brenda testified under questioning by Linda's lawyer that she heard Linda say that she would pay $700 for the puppy and that she also heard Sam say that he would sell the dog for that amount. Unfortunately for Linda, Brenda also testified in response to questioning by Sam's lawyer that Sam distinctly told Linda that he would only sell the puppy to her if Linda came with cash for the puppy within seven days. Linda did not show up with the money for ten days and Sam had already sold the dog to someone else. The judge ruled in favor of Sam.

-The questioning of Brenda by Linda's lawyer is called ______, and the questioning of Brenda by Sam's lawyer is called ______.

A) Absolute examination; counter-examination
B) True examination; analysis examination
C) True examination; trickster examination
D) Direct examination; interrogating examination
E) Direct examination; cross-examination

Question 68

Which of the following is a document that notifies the defendant of the lawsuit and explains that if the defendant does not respond to the lawsuit within a certain period of time, a default judgment will be entered?

A) Complaint
B) Answer
C) Summons
D) Instructional guide
E) Transactional analysis

Question 69

Which of the following is true regarding tools of discovery?

A) The only tool of discovery is interrogatories.
B) Depositions are the only tool of discovery available to plaintiffs, but defendants may use both interrogatories and depositions.
C) Summary motions, interrogatories, and depositions, are tools of discovery available to all parties.
D) Interrogatories and depositions are tools of discovery available to all parties, but summary motions and requests to produce documents are not tools of discovery.
E) Interrogatories, depositions, and requests to produce documents are all tools of discovery available to all parties.

Question 70

Which of the following are written questions that one party sends to another to answer under oath?

A) Interrogatories
B) Depositions
C) Inquiries
D) Subpoenas
E) Sworn assertions

Question 71

"Puppy Woes." Sam promised to sell Linda a Welsh Corgi puppy for $700 but backed out of the deal. Linda sued Sam in state court for breach of contract and asked for a jury to hear the case. During jury selection, one juror, Ann, said that she did not think she could be fair to Linda because Linda did not appear to be a dog lover. Linda's lawyer asked that Ann not hear the case on the basis that she could not be fair, and the judge excused Ann. Linda also decided that another juror, Sandy, looked at her in a grumpy manner so, without a reason given, Linda's lawyer asked the judge to excuse that juror from serving. The judge did so. After the jury was chosen, Linda's lawyer made a statement to the jury as did Sam's lawyer. Linda's lawyer then called to the witness stand Brenda, a friend of Linda, who heard the discussion held between Linda and Sam regarding the purchase of the puppy. Brenda testified under questioning by Linda's lawyer that she heard Linda say that she would pay $700 for the puppy and that she also heard Sam say that he would sell the dog for that amount. Unfortunately for Linda, Brenda also testified in response to questioning by Sam's lawyer that Sam distinctly told Linda that he would only sell the puppy to her if Linda came with cash for the puppy within seven days. Linda did not show up with the money for ten days and Sam had already sold the dog to someone else. The judge ruled in favor of Sam.

-In choosing the jury, the lawyers were engaged in ______.

A) Voir dire
B) Jury analysis
C) Jury review
D) Ven dere
E) Shadowing

Question 72

At a[n] ______, attorneys examine a witness under oath with a court reporter present.

A) Deposition
B) Interrogatory
C) Inquiry
D) Pre-trial conference
E) Pre-trial mediation

Question 73

The plaintiff must provide the defendant in a lawsuit with a copy of the complaint. That process is called ______.

A) Summons issuance
B) Service of process
C) Service delivery
D) Subpoena delivery
E) In personam service

Question 74

Alice, a resident of Michigan, claims that Pet Food Company Inc., put out some dog food that made her dog, Champ, sick. Champ is a prize winning poodle. He survived the pet food fiasco but only after traveling to a veterinarian in Florida specializing in poodles and having two very expensive surgeries. Additionally, his ability to sire has been impaired, and Alice will have no more breeding fees from Champ. Her damages are $80,000. Pet Food Company Inc., is incorporated in Delaware, with its principal place of business in Michigan. Alice asks you whether she can sue in federal court. What would you tell her and why?

Question 75

Cindy who was riding her new bicycle accidentally ran over jogger Bruce's foot. He sues. Cindy is suspicious that he is not hurt as badly as he claims. What would Cindy want to know for trial, and how could she and her lawyer find out? Fully discuss your answer and methods by which Cindy could obtain information.

Question 76

"Puppy Woes." Sam promised to sell Linda a Welsh Corgi puppy for $700 but backed out of the deal. Linda sued Sam in state court for breach of contract and asked for a jury to hear the case. During jury selection, one juror, Ann, said that she did not think she could be fair to Linda because Linda did not appear to be a dog lover. Linda's lawyer asked that Ann not hear the case on the basis that she could not be fair, and the judge excused Ann. Linda also decided that another juror, Sandy, looked at her in a grumpy manner so, without a reason given, Linda's lawyer asked the judge to excuse that juror from serving. The judge did so. After the jury was chosen, Linda's lawyer made a statement to the jury as did Sam's lawyer. Linda's lawyer then called to the witness stand Brenda, a friend of Linda, who heard the discussion held between Linda and Sam regarding the purchase of the puppy. Brenda testified under questioning by Linda's lawyer that she heard Linda say that she would pay $700 for the puppy and that she also heard Sam say that he would sell the dog for that amount. Unfortunately for Linda, Brenda also testified in response to questioning by Sam's lawyer that Sam distinctly told Linda that he would only sell the puppy to her if Linda came with cash for the puppy within seven days. Linda did not show up with the money for ten days and Sam had already sold the dog to someone else. The judge ruled in favor of Sam.

-The challenge to the juror who said that they could not be fair is referred to as a[n] ________.

A) Peremptory challenge
B) Challenge for cause
C) Stipulated challenge
D) Fairness challenge
E) Approved challenge

Question 77

Define the term "in personam" jurisdiction and discuss where corporations and individuals are generally subject to that type of jurisdiction. Include in your answer a discussion of long-arm jurisdiction.

Question 78

Cindy ran her car over Hank in her company parking lot breaking his leg. That happened because, without warning, Cindy's car brakes failed. Hank sues Cindy. Cindy decides to do nothing because she sees no way that she can win the lawsuit because she did indeed strike Hank. Is she right? Why or why not? What would you suggest that she do in the civil litigation? Why is it important that Cindy proceed correctly and immediately at this point in the litigation?

Question 79

A defendant uses a[n] ______ when her or his answer admits that the facts contained in the complaint are accurate but also includes additional facts that justify the defendant's actions and provide a legally sound reason to deny relief to the plaintiff.

A) Secondary answer
B) Pleading defense
C) Affirmative defense
D) Formal answer
E) Personam answer

Question 80

Marilyn, a resident of Ohio, suffered personal injury while operating her tractor in Ohio. She filed suit in state court against the manufacturer, Company A, incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in Illinois, and also against the seller, Company B, incorporated in Ohio with its principal place of business in Ohio. Marilyn and Company B informally agreed to settle out of court, but the agreement was subject to the agreement of Company B's insurer. Before a final agreement was reached in regard to settlement with Company B, Company A filed a motion in state court to remove the case to federal court. Although Marilyn opposed removal, the state court granted Company A's motion. After the case was removed to federal court, Marilyn and Company B finalized their settlement agreement and Company B was dismissed from the lawsuit. The federal district court proceeded to hear the case and ruled in favor of Company
A. Marilyn appealed on the basis that because diversity between the parties was lacking, the federal district court had no jurisdiction over the case. She claims that the case should be remanded to state court for a new trial. What should the appellate court rule regarding whether the state trial court properly granted the petition for removal and what will be the likely outcome on appeal?
Following the Caterpillar case discussed in the text, the appellate court will likely rule that the state court should not have granted Company A's initial motion to remove the case because the settlement was not complete, Company B was still in the case, and there was no diversity of citizenship. The ruling in favor of Company A, however, should be upheld because the settlement agreement was later approved, Company B was dismissed, and the case satisfied jurisdictional requirements by the time the federal district court issued its decision. Requiring the federal district court to send the case back to the state system would be an undue waste of judicial resources.