Deck 3: The Us Legal System

Question 1

The US legal system has one main court system.

Answer 1

False

Question 2

In what state is XYZ Bank, a federally chartered bank, considered a citizen?

A) The bank is considered a citizen of any state in which it is located, meaning any state in which the bank has branches.
B) The bank is considered a citizen of the state in which it is located, meaning the state in which its main office, as specified in its articles of incorporation, is located.
C) The bank is considered a citizen only of Washington, D.C.
D) The bank is considered a citizen only of the state in which it does its largest volume of business.
E) The bank is considered a citizen of Washington, D.C. and also of the state in which it does its largest volume of business.

Answer 2

B

Question 3

Which of the following properly notifies a defendant that they are being sued and explains how and when to respond to a complaint?

A) Answer
B) Service document
C) Court report
D) Summons
E) Court docket

Answer 3

D

Question 4

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

Question 5

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

Question 6

Juries decide questions of law.

Question 7

If a potential juror's response to a question indicates bias, an attorney should use a peremptory challenge to remove the juror.

Question 8

To minimize extra costs, businesses will sometimes include in their contracts a forum selection clause.

Question 9

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

Question 10

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

Question 11

Any person can bring a case to court if they believe they have been harmed.

Question 12

Long arm statutes require minimum contacts to serve out-of-state defendants.

Question 13

In rem jurisdiction is jurisdiction over property.

Question 14

Jurisdiction refers to:

A) A defendant's interest in having an impartial jury preside over a case.
B) The plaintiff's interest in having a case heard in district court.
C) The courts' power to render binding decisions on parties before them.
D) The power of the plaintiff to file a lawsuit in any court of his choosing.
E) The power of a defendant to have a case removed to an unbiased court.

Question 15

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

Question 16

Critics of the adversarial system cite time and expense of a lawsuit along with damage to reputations as some of the drawbacks of litigation.

Question 17

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

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

Question 18

Cooper sues Company A in state court in South Carolina, where he lives, for negligence alleging personal injury and property damage of $100,000 after a truck driven by an employee of Company A rear-ended his pickup truck. Company A is incorporated in Delaware, has its headquarters in New York, but does a substantial amount of business in South Carolina. Claiming diversity of citizenship, Company A seeks removal to federal district court, but Cooper 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 South Carolina, 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 South Carolina, 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 South Carolina, 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 South Carolina, 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 19

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

Question 20

Only one party may appeal from a final judgment.

Question 21

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 22

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 federal jurisdiction, it cannot 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 23

If a defendant is a corporation:

A) No service of process is required.
B) Only the president of a corporation can be served.
C) Only the agent of the corporation can be served.
D) Generally either the president of the corporation or an agent can be served.
E) The corporation does not have to receive service.

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

Jill and Joe are in business and designed a new technology in which they received a patent from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Both Jill and Joe are New Mexico residents but spend the summer months in Minnesota. They find out a competitor has violated their patent. In which court would they want to bring a lawsuit?

A) The New Mexico state court only
B) The Federal District Court
C) The Minnesota state court only
D) Either the New Mexico or Minnesota state court
E) Either a state or a federal court

Question 26

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 27

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 28

For diversity-of-citizenship, which of the following is needed?

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 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

Patty sued Raphael for hitting her car, alleging that Raphael was texting at the time when the accident happened. Patty did not present hard evidence of texting, such as phone records. The jury held Raphael was not liable for the accident because Patty had not proved Raphael was texting, and that in fact it was Patty who failed to yield to Raphael. Patty should:

A) Appeal and try to convince the appellate court that Raphael actually was texting.
B) Ask the judge to grant a default judgment because the jury was wrong.
C) Ask the Supreme Court to overturn the decision because she made clear Raphael was texting.
D) Appeal to federal court to overturn the decision, which was made in state court.
E) Move on with her life, as she was unable to convince the jury to side with her on a question of fact.

Question 31

Dr. Tanaka was served with a malpractice lawsuit based on allegedly removing the wrong organ. Following discovery, it becomes clear that the plaintiff has no credible evidence against the doctor, and that no reasonable jury could rule in the plaintiff's favor. How should Dr. Tanaka'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 32

Minimum contact requirements:

A) Are the same in every state.
B) Are used to define what personal service means.
C) Were established in International Shoe Co. v. State of Washington.
D) Prevent a defendant from ever being served while out-of-state.
E) Do not include committing a tort within a state.

Question 33

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 34

Which of the following would fall under the state court's jurisdiction?

A) Admiralty cases
B) Patent and trademark claims
C) Adoption
D) Bankruptcy
E) Federal criminal prosecutions

Question 35

Matthew, who attends a local state college in his home state, is prevented from wearing a T-shirt with a gun picture on it to his public school. He wants to sue because he believes his First Amendment rights are being violated. Which court could Matthew sue in?

A) Federal court because diversity jurisdiction exists.
B) Federal or state court because the case raises a federal question.
C) The U.S. Supreme Court because the case is a First Amendment case.
D) The state appeals court because the case raises a Constitutional issue.
E) The federal appeals court because the case raises a Constitutional issue.

Question 36

The state court system has exclusive jurisdiction over ________.

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

Question 37

In order for a federal court to hear a case involving a federal question, the amount in controversy must be at least ________.

A) No amount is needed
B) $75,000
C) $80,000
D) $90,000
E) $100,000

Question 38

Which statement about state and federal court jurisdiction is true?

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 39

DeRay and Jenna live in different states. DeRay is suing Jenna for injuring him by causing him to fall. He is seeking $20,000 in damages. DeRay can sue in:

A) Federal court only, because diversity jurisdiction exists.
B) Federal court only, because DeRay and Jenna live in different states.
C) Federal court only because the amount in controversy exceeds $10,000.
D) Both federal and state court.
E) The state where the fall took place.

Question 40

The federal court system has exclusive jurisdiction over ________.

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 41

Diego's company is looking to expand its business in the United States. His supervisor asks him what the company should consider from a legal perspective while evaluating which state to expand the business to. Which of the following should Diego consider?

A) Companies should consider the tax laws and infrastructure for an expanding company, not the legal system since each state's legal system models the federal laws.
B) Companies should look at the laws of the state, the court system located in the state, and whether the state's court system seems hospitable to business.
C) Companies should evaluate how many businesses have succeeded in lawsuits within the state to determine if the state's judges are pro-business.
D) Legally speaking, all state court systems follow the same Model Rules for Business and should not treat companies expanding into their state any differently.
E) Companies should look at the success rate of lawyers defending companies that specialize in business litigation in each state to determine if the laws and court system seem fair to business.

Question 42

The U.S. Courts of Appeals can hear appeals from ________.

A) any federal district court
B) neighboring district courts
C) district courts in its geographic area
D) the U.S. Supreme Court
E) state supreme courts

Question 43

State intermediate courts of appeal:

A) Exist in every state
B) Are analogous to the U.S. Supreme Court
C) Have very limited jurisdiction
D) Are courts of last resort
E) Are analogous to federal circuit courts of appeal

Question 44

For a court to be able to provide a ruling in the case, there must be an adverse relationship between the parties, the action must give rise to an actual legal dispute and the courts must have the ability to render the decision that will resolve the dispute and not be a hypothetical situation. This is known as ________.

A) case or controversy
B) mootness
C) ripeness
D) venue
E) compulsory

Question 45

A full bench for the United States Supreme Court consists of how many justices?

A) 10
B) 8
C) 12
D) 9
E) 7

Question 46

Cars R Us is a manufacturer of car parts looking to expand their business outside of their current state with suppliers in other states. As part of their contracts with new parts dealers, their attorney would insert a ________ clause that will specify the law that will be applied to resolve any disputes under the contract.

A) breach of contract
B) venue
C) choice-of-law
D) change-of-law
E) court choice

Question 47

If a plaintiff files a case in state court that could also have been filed in federal court, does the defendant have any say in where the case is heard?

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 at 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 48

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit hears appeals from all but which one of the following courts:

A) United States Court of Federal Claims
B) Court of International Trade
C) Patent and Trademark Office
D) United States District Courts
E) United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims

Question 49

Cases heard by the Supreme Court of China (Taiwan) are presented to how many judge(s)?

A) 15
B) 9
C) 18
D) 5
E) 1

Question 50

[Appellate Court] DeShaun, who is a bit eccentric, is fed up with the way a certain employer in his town treats employees and decides to sue on behalf of all those employees. DeShaun also says that he is going to start his case at the appellate court level, skipping over all those "lesser" judges. DeShaun says that those justices will surely hear him out and that he will also seek a jury.
Will an appellate court hear DeShaun'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 DeShaun 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 DeShaun files his case in state court as opposed to federal court.
D) Yes, but DeShaun is not entitled to a jury.
E) No, because DeShaun is required to first file the case in the appropriate trial court.

Question 51

[Appellate Court] DeShaun, who is a bit eccentric, is fed up with the way a certain employer in his town treats employees and decides to sue on behalf of all those employees. DeShaun also says that he is going to start his case at the appellate court level, skipping over all those "lesser" judges. DeShaun says that those justices will surely hear him out and that he will also seek a jury.
Regardless of the court involved, can DeShaun 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 52

Which of the following is a path that a case could take through the U.S. court system?

A) State trial court to a state supreme court to the U.S. Supreme Court.
B) State trial court to the U.S. Supreme Court.
C) U.S. district court to the state supreme court to the U.S. Supreme Court.
D) State trial court to the U.S. district court to the U.S. Supreme Court.
E) State trial court to the U.S. circuit court of appeals.

Question 53

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 54

The US District Courts are considered ________?

A) trial courts
B) appeals courts
C) courts of last resort
D) limited courts
E) preemptory courts

Question 55

Neville knows that he can bring his case against Ramona in a state court in Tennessee but he doesn't know the correct 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 56

[Revenge] Tamra, a first year law student, slipped on a freshly mopped floor while walking to class. She bumped into Anton, another first year law student, breaking his glasses. He was very angry with Tamra and slashed all of her car tires causing damages of $1,500. Anton also decided to sue Tamra for negligence claiming damages of $300 for his broken glasses. He decided that he already knew all about the law and did not need a lawyer. Anton sued Tamra in state court. Tamra, in the same lawsuit, brought an action against Anton for slashing her tires. At the trial in state court, Tamra told the judge that a friend, Aimee, told Tamra that she saw Anton slash all of Tamra's tires. The judge disallowed Tamra's testimony on that issue. Aimee also came to court and testified about seeing Anton slashing all of Tamra's tires. The state court judge ruled in favor of Tamra awarding her $1,500 in damages. Anton said that he was not giving up and that he would seek double damages on appeal in federal court. Tamra and Anton live in different states when not attending school. After the trial, Tamra reported Anton's action of slashing her tires to the police, who said that they would proceed with a criminal action against Anton. Anton goes to see Alex, a recent graduate who had just passed the bar, and asked Alex to represent him in a federal court appeal.
Anton asked Alex what his chances are regarding an appeal filed in federal court. What should Alex tell Anton?

A) He should tell Anton that a federal appeal looks promising but he would not be able to get double damages.
B) He should tell Anton that the federal appeal looks promising but he would have to prove Tamra was negligent.
C) He should tell Anton that the federal appeal looks good if the law school admits fault in leaving water on the floor.
D) He should tell Anton that the federal appeal is not allowed because there are not enough damages at issue.
E) He should tell Anton that a case from a state trial court would not be appealed to federal court.

Question 57

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 based on age discrimination if she had not quit. 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 58

Susan has lost her appeal in her state supreme court on a matter concerning a question of pure state law. She wishes to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. Susan:

A) Can appeal because her case has already been heard in the court of last resort in her state.
B) Cannot appeal because cases arising in state court can never be heard in federal court.
C) Cannot appeal because cases arising in state court can never be heard in the U.S. Supreme Court.
D) Cannot appeal because her case has not yet been heard in a U.S. District Court.
E) Cannot appeal because the U.S. Supreme Court will not hear cases considering questions of pure state law.

Question 59

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 60

[Appellate Court] DeShaun, who is a bit eccentric, is fed up with the way a certain employer in his town treats employees and decides to sue on behalf of all those employees. DeShaun also says that he is going to start his case at the appellate court level, skipping over all those "lesser" judges. DeShaun says that those justices will surely hear him out and that he will also seek a jury.
Assuming DeShaun eventually ends up 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 61

The Michigan legislature is contemplating a new tax law that would affect Julie's business. Julie consults an attorney in order to sue the legislature. What should the attorney tell her?

A) That she does not have standing
B) That the case is moot
C) That the case is not ripe
D) That she would have to sue in federal court
E) That she does not have personal jurisdiction to bring the suit

Question 62

Morgan sued Rachel over a motor vehicle accident, but they 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 63

[Puppy Woes] Ronaldo promised to sell Linda a Dalmatian puppy for $700 but backed out of the deal. Linda sued Ronaldo in state court for breach of contract and asked for a jury to hear the case. During jury selection, one juror, Mika, 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 Mika not hear the case on the basis that she could not be fair, and the judge excused Mika. 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 Ronaldo's lawyer. Linda's lawyer then called to the witness stand Jules, a friend of Linda, who heard the discussion held between Linda and Ronaldo regarding the purchase of the puppy. Jules 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 Ronaldo say that he would sell the dog for that amount. Unfortunately for Linda, Jules also testified in response to questioning by Ronaldo's lawyer that Ronaldo 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 Ronaldo had already sold the dog to someone else. The judge ruled in favor of Ronaldo.
Once Linda's attorney presented all the evidence, Ronaldo's attorney could ask for a[n] ________.

A) directed verdict
B) closing argument
C) immediate dismissal
D) redirect examination
E) mistrial

Question 64

In a criminal case against Anton, what standard of proof would the judge apply?

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 65

Consumer Goods Corporation sells products that are poorly made. Tina, who has never bought a product from Consumer Goods, files a suit against the firm alleging that its products are defective. The firm could ask for dismissal of the suit on the basis:

A) that the case is not ripe.
B) that the case is moot.
C) that Tina does not have standing.
D) that Tina cannot sue a corporation.
E) that only a state entity has jurisdiction to sue a corporation in its borders.

Question 66

If after reviewing the evidence in the case, there is no factual dispute and one party is entitled to judgment prior to trial, the court may grant which of the following?

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 67

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 68

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 69

Lilly and Jorge are parties to a contract dispute. Lilly's attorney is questioning Jorge under oath and in the presence of a court reporter. This is known as a(n) ________.

A) pleading
B) interrogatory
C) deposition
D) inquisition
E) production of information

Question 70

Written questions that one party sends to another to answer under oath are called ________.

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

Question 71

If a defendant fails to respond to the plaintiff's complaint with an answer when the plaintiff's complaint alleges facts to support a response, the plaintiff could ask the court for a(n) ________.

A) answer on the pleadings
B) judgment for cause
C) final judgment
D) default judgment
E) entry judgment

Question 72

[Revenge] Tamra, a first year law student, slipped on a freshly mopped floor while walking to class. She bumped into Anton, another first year law student, breaking his glasses. He was very angry with Tamra and slashed all of her car tires causing damages of $1,500. Anton also decided to sue Tamra for negligence claiming damages of $300 for his broken glasses. He decided that he already knew all about the law and did not need a lawyer. Anton sued Tamra in state court. Tamra, in the same lawsuit, brought an action against Anton for slashing her tires. At the trial in state court, Tamra told the judge that a friend, Aimee, told Tamra that she saw Anton slash all of Tamra's tires. The judge disallowed Tamra's testimony on that issue. Aimee also came to court and testified about seeing Anton slashing all of Tamra's tires. The state court judge ruled in favor of Tamra awarding her $1,500 in damages. Anton said that he was not giving up and that he would seek double damages on appeal in federal court. Tamra and Anton live in different states when not attending school. After the trial, Tamra reported Anton's action of slashing her tires to the police, who said that they would proceed with a criminal action against Anton. Anton goes to see Alex, a recent graduate who had just passed the bar, and asked Alex to represent him in a federal court appeal.
Should the judge have disallowed Tamra's testimony about what Aimee 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 Aimee 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 73

Billy witnessed a hit-and-run but is gravely ill with cancer. Xavier, who was injured in the accident, would like to preserve Billy's testimony for trial in case Billy dies before the trial date. What should Xavier 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 Xavier can do.

Question 74

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 75

[Revenge] Tamra, a first year law student, slipped on a freshly mopped floor while walking to class. She bumped into Anton, another first year law student, breaking his glasses. He was very angry with Tamra and slashed all of her car tires causing damages of $1,500. Anton also decided to sue Tamra for negligence claiming damages of $300 for his broken glasses. He decided that he already knew all about the law and did not need a lawyer. Anton sued Tamra in state court. Tamra, in the same lawsuit, brought an action against Anton for slashing her tires. At the trial in state court, Tamra told the judge that a friend, Aimee, told Tamra that she saw Anton slash all of Tamra's tires. The judge disallowed Tamra's testimony on that issue. Aimee also came to court and testified about seeing Anton slashing all of Tamra's tires. The state court judge ruled in favor of Tamra awarding her $1,500 in damages. Anton said that he was not giving up and that he would seek double damages on appeal in federal court. Tamra and Anton live in different states when not attending school. After the trial, Tamra reported Anton's action of slashing her tires to the police, who said that they would proceed with a criminal action against Anton. Anton goes to see Alex, a recent graduate who had just passed the bar, and asked Alex to represent him in a federal court appeal.
Tamra's action against Anton for the tires is called a ________.

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

Question 76

If after reviewing the pleadings, the judge determines that the only reasonable decision is in favor of the moving party, the court may grant which of the following?

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 77

[Puppy Woes] Ronaldo promised to sell Linda a Dalmatian puppy for $700 but backed out of the deal. Linda sued Ronaldo in state court for breach of contract and asked for a jury to hear the case. During jury selection, one juror, Mika, 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 Mika not hear the case on the basis that she could not be fair, and the judge excused Mika. 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 Ronaldo's lawyer. Linda's lawyer then called to the witness stand Jules, a friend of Linda, who heard the discussion held between Linda and Ronaldo regarding the purchase of the puppy. Jules 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 Ronaldo say that he would sell the dog for that amount. Unfortunately for Linda, Jules also testified in response to questioning by Ronaldo's lawyer that Ronaldo 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 Ronaldo had already sold the dog to someone else. The judge ruled in favor of Ronaldo.
The challenge Linda's lawyer made to Mika is referred to as a[n] ________.

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

Question 78

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 79

What is the document called that informs 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 80

[Puppy Woes] Ronaldo promised to sell Linda a Dalmatian puppy for $700 but backed out of the deal. Linda sued Ronaldo in state court for breach of contract and asked for a jury to hear the case. During jury selection, one juror, Mika, 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 Mika not hear the case on the basis that she could not be fair, and the judge excused Mika. 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 Ronaldo's lawyer. Linda's lawyer then called to the witness stand Jules, a friend of Linda, who heard the discussion held between Linda and Ronaldo regarding the purchase of the puppy. Jules 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 Ronaldo say that he would sell the dog for that amount. Unfortunately for Linda, Jules also testified in response to questioning by Ronaldo's lawyer that Ronaldo 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 Ronaldo had already sold the dog to someone else. The judge ruled in favor of Ronaldo.
When lawyers choose a jury, it is called ________.

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