Exam #1 Flashcards

Question

What were the courts of the chancellor called?

Answer 1

equity courts (because they started to give remedies of equity!)

Answer 2

ordering a party to perform an agreement as promised "do that"

Answer 3

ordering a party to cease engaging in a specific activity or to undo some wrong or injury "stop doing that"

Answer 4

the cancellation of a contractual obligation

Answer 5

fail to fulfill it

Answer 6

equitable maxims

Answer 7

sues. "comPLAINs"

Answer 8

is being sued. "must DEFEND"

Answer 9

brought the lawsuit.

Answer 10

is being sued.

Answer 11

time allowed for you to charge a crime.

Answer 12

to stand on decided cases

Answer 13

follow the precedent

Answer 14

1. A court must not overturn its own precedents unless there is a compelling reason to do so. 2. Decisions made by a higher court are binding in lower courts.

Answer 15

precedents that must be followed within a jurisdiction

Answer 16

- controlling precedents - constitutions - statutes - regulations

Answer 17

- no precedent - courts look at pervasive authorities (legal authorities not binding to the court) for opinions

Answer 18

malum in se --> bad in and of itself (murder, theft, arson, sexual abuse) malum prohibitum --> not inherently wrong, bad because we say so (drinking underage, speeding) A purpose of the law is to distinguish between the two.

Answer 19

actis reis --> the act itself mens rea --> the intent

Answer 20

legislative branch

Answer 21

regulatory agencies

Answer 22

judicial branch

Answer 23

rights that cannot be taken away

Answer 24

two houses HOR and Senate

Answer 25

delegation of certain powers to Congress

Answer 26

establishment of the executive branch (law enforcement)

Answer 27

the US Constitution

Answer 28

limited and delegated powers.

Answer 29

the first 10 amendments to the Constitution

Answer 30

FALSE! Rights of the people are inherent, rested in people, endowed by their Creator.

Answer 31

- enter into treaties - coin money - have an army

Answer 32

article i - legislative branch article ii - executive branch article iii - judicial branch

Answer 33

legal reasoning

Answer 34

IRAC! Issue Rule Application Conclusion

Answer 35

jurisprudence.

Answer 36

cases on point.

Answer 37

Areas not covered by statutory or administrative law.

Answer 38

restatements of law

Answer 39

- contracts - torts - agency - trusts - property - restitution - security - judgments - conflict of laws

Answer 40

natural law theory

Answer 41

positive law (national law)

Answer 42

historical school

Answer 43

legal realism

Answer 44

historical school and legal realism

Answer 45

legal positivism

Answer 46

MORE likely

Answer 47

LESS likely

Answer 48

FALSE - they believe that they should take those things into account.

Answer 49

sociological school

Answer 50

legal realism

Answer 51

Supreme Court (federal) ^^ US Circuit Courts of Appeal (appellate) ^^ US District Courts (trial)

Answer 52

It changes state-by-state, but we learned... Supreme Court ^^ Court of Appeals ^^ Trial Courts (county)

Answer 53

U.S. Code (U.S.C.)

Answer 54

the US Constitution

Answer 55

False - they can grant you more protection, but not less. more rights, not fewer.

Answer 56

A state law.

Answer 57

All 50 states must get it passed individually (Congress can't do it!) example: interstate commerce

Answer 58

corporation

Answer 59

partnership

Answer 60

"letter ruling"

Answer 61

English history case law

Answer 62

- Queen Elizabeth I - Queen Victoria - Queen Elizabeth II

Answer 63

In common law tradition, plaintiffs had to write writs. They were specific causes of action that the law courts recognized.

Answer 64

no relief / remedy.

Answer 65

FALSE! Equitable is when it did NOT exist under common law.

Answer 66

law means 'King's courts'

Answer 67

stare decisis

Answer 68

jurisdiction.

Answer 69

- change in the legislation - change in public policy - change in public opinion

Answer 70

"civil law"

Answer 71

"common law"

Answer 72

Roman codex.

Answer 73

common law

Answer 74

common law

Answer 75

common law

Answer 76

the plaintiff

Answer 77

the defendant

Answer 78

substantive laws

Answer 79

procedural law

Answer 80

private law

Answer 81

public law

Answer 82

criminal law

Answer 83

in the United States Statutes at Large

Answer 84

parallel citation

Answer 85

concurring

Answer 86

dissenting

Answer 87

per curiam

Answer 88

a few words / sentences have been omitted

Answer 89

a full paragraph or more has been omitted

Answer 90

the judiciary can decide if laws / actions from the other two branches are constitutional

Answer 91

jurisdiction!

Answer 92

- federal questions are involved (a plaintiff's cause of action is based on the US Constitution, treaty, or federal law) - diversity of citizenship (plaintiff and defendant are residents of different states AND the amount in controversy is > $75k)

Answer 93

concurrent jurisdiction

Answer 94

exclusive jurisdiction

Answer 95

- federal crimes - antitrust - bankruptcy - patents - copyrights - trademarks - suits against the US

Answer 96

- divorce - adoption - all matters not subject to federal jurisdiction

Answer 97

- federal questions - diversity of citizenship

Answer 98

the sufficient stake in a manner to justify seeking relief through the court system

Answer 99

1. harm 2. causation 3. remedy

Answer 100

litigation

Answer 101

ADR (alternative dispute resolution)

Answer 102

negotiation

Answer 103

arbitration

Answer 104

says "...United States..."

Answer 105

says "...District Court..."

Answer 106

1. person who is making the motion says there's no genuine issue of material fact 2. moving party entitled to judgment at a matter of law

Answer 107

the loser pays

Answer 108

parties pay for their own counsel

Answer 109

jurisdicton.

Answer 110

Constitutionally-valid basis for asserting power + Adequate service of process = Personal Jurisdiction

Answer 111

looks at the defendant's contacts with the state and determines if it's fair in-state plaintiff and out-of-state defendant

Answer 112

wield personal jurisdiction out-of-state

Answer 113

False: Federal courts have LIMITED subject matter jurisdiction.

Answer 114

1. a federal question (constitution or federal laws at issue in the case) 2. diversity of citizenship (no plaintiff is from the same state as any defendant and the remedy requested must be over $75k)

Answer 115

Courts do not have it unless Congress has explicitly given it to them.

Answer 116

Courts have it unless Congress has explicitly taken it away.

Answer 117

concurrent SMJ

Answer 118

exclusive SMJ

Answer 119

False - No domestic relations cases in federal court.

Answer 120

complaint.

Answer 121

the plea that starts the litigation filed by the plaintiff

Answer 122

When the defendant pleads a complaint with respect to the original

Answer 123

interrogatories

Answer 124

deposition

Answer 125

As a part of discovery, when you want to see a physical source or document material (ex. bank records)

Answer 126

As a part of discovery, when you want to see an object (ex. a car)

Answer 127

the governing rules of all civil trials held in federal courts

Answer 128

- fixed rate - hourly rate - contingency (% of final)

Answer 129

1. jurisdiction (shows the court has subject-matter jurisdiction) 2. legal theory (facts establishing the claim and the basis for relief) 3. remedy (amount of damages sought)

Answer 130

service of process

Answer 131

asks the court to dismiss a case

Answer 132

asks the court to delete / remove certain paragraphs from the complaint

Answer 133

asks the court to compel the plaintiff to clarify the cause of action

Answer 134

motion by either party to ask the court for judgment because there are no facts in the dispute

Answer 135

asks the court to force the nonmoving party (defendant) to comply with a discovery request

Answer 136

asks the court to enter a judgment in his / her favor without a trial

Answer 137

the right to a jury trial for cases at law in federal court when the amount in controversy is > $20

Answer 138

French for "to speak the truth" the jury selection process

Answer 139

you ask that an individual not be sworn in without providing any reason

Answer 140

you give a reason why a juror shouldn't be sworn in

Answer 141

you have a relationship to someone

Answer 142

you have a strong bias that would influence ability to participate

Answer 143

FALSE - You cannot argue in the opening statement.

Answer 144

- relevant (relevant to the case) - probative (attempt to prove / disprove something) - admissible (under evidentiary rules - can it come in in the first place?)

Answer 145

- testimony - documentary (the deed) - real / tangible (the knife)

Answer 146

EXPERT -> specialized knowledge, gives their opinion ORDINARY -> talks about the 5 senses, gives facts

Answer 147

the deposition

Answer 148

directed verdict

Answer 149

uncommon because it would take place during trial - in theory, this should be resolved with a summary judgment pretrial

Answer 150

defendant.

Answer 151

pre-trial motions.

Answer 152

you have a relationship to someone

Answer 153

you have a strong bias that would influence your ability to participate

Answer 154

FALSE. You can only tell the jury factual statements in the opening and CANNOT ARGUE.

Answer 155

- relevant (relevant to the case) - probative (attempts to prove / disprove something) - admissible (accepted under evidentiary rules)

Answer 156

- documentary - testimony - real / tangible

Answer 157

ordinary and expert

Answer 158

deposition

Answer 159

directed verdict.

Answer 160

Directed verdict is rare because it happens during the trial. Most times the issue of the case being obviously in one favor over the other is resolved prior to trial with a summary judgment.

Answer 161

bench trial.

Answer 162

It needs to be authenticated for it to come into court and have the jury consider it.

Answer 163

You need to demonstrate the chain of custody (how it got from the crime scene to the courtroom, who tampered with it, etc.).

Answer 164

verdict and the judgment

Answer 165

a judgment as a matter of law - "the jury is screwed up and you need to rule in our favor" - in federal court, you can only request this if you asked for a directed verdict first

Answer 166

a judgment non-obstante veredicto (judgment notwithstanding the verdict) - "the verdict is wrong, give us judgment anyway"

Answer 167

not self-incriminate.

Answer 168

brief argument decision

Answer 169

Requests for further appeal.

Answer 170

It is a formal request for the Supreme Court to hear a case that comes from a lower court.

Answer 171

It is an expedited attempt to overturn or get a different result from a lower court's decision.

Answer 172

It stands for "petition for leave to appeal," and it a request to a higher court to allow an appeal to be heard when the right to appeal is not automatic.

Answer 173

Execution on final judgments (essentially, enforcing them)

Answer 174

When you send a letter to the employer to take things out of their paycheck, etc.

Answer 175

Taking of real estate. Public auction of taken property.

Answer 176

Taking of a car, other large objects.

Answer 177

The assumption that people will behave in the manner as directed by the law.

Answer 178

defendant - forum - litigation (state)

Answer 179

Personal jurisdiction : is when a court has jurisdiction over a person that lives in a certain geographic area or minimum contacts with the state. Subject Matter Jurisdiction : refers to the limitations on the types of cases a court can hear. Certain courts can only hear certain disputes.

Answer 180

1. define the term (Summary judgment is a pretrial motion to judge the case in favor of one party or the other, avoiding a trial altogether.) 2. explain the term (In order to achieve summary judgment, you must meet two requirements. Firstly, you must determine that the other party presents no genuine issue of material fact. This essentially means that they have no concrete evidence to bring forth to the court. Second, the moving party must have the right to judgment at a matter of law.) 3. cite a court case or hypothetical (As discussed in class, the Apple v. Amazon case included the issue of summary judgment. Amazon, as the defendant, was able to achieve a partial motion for summary judgment because Apple ultimately presented no evidence to support their claim that Amazon was falsely advertising a relation to Apple through the use of the term 'APPSTORE.')

Answer 181

1. define the term (Personal jurisdiction is the power of the court to render a valid and binding judgment on a case.) 2. explain the term (Personal jurisdiction requires the court to have both a constitutionally-valid basis for asserting power on the issue as well as an adequate service of process. This adequate service of process involves the defendant being officially notified that there is a suit against them, to which they are directed to respond.) 3. cite a court case or hypothetical (In order to assess personal jurisdiction, one can use the 'minimum contacts' test for an in-state plaintiff and an out-of-state defendant. This test is a case-by-case assessment of the defendant themselves, the forum (state), and the litigation. It helps to determine if the party has had enough contact with and within the state to warrant the venue being appropriately in that state / if that state has the power to try them. If a court has a long-arm statute, though, they can sue a party out-of-state.)

Answer 182

1. define the term (Subject matter jurisdiction is the power of a court to rule on a case depending on the subject matter, or actual content, of the case.) 2. explain the term (In order for a federal court to have subject matter jurisdiction, it must both involve a federal question (an issue of federal law or the Constitution) and include diversity of citizenship (where the plaintiff and defendant are from different states and the amount in question is greater than $75k.)) 3. cite a court case or hypothetical (As a general rule for subject matter jurisdiction, the federal government assumes they do not possess it unless they have explicitly been granted it by Congress. On the other hand, when on the state level, state courts can assume that they do have subject matter jurisdiction unless it has been explicitly taken away by Congress. Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction on cases of bankruptcy, copyright, and patents, while states have exclusive jurisdiction on divorce, adoption, and other domestic issues. The state and federal courts have concurrent jurisdiction on issues of federal questions and diversity of citizenship.)

Answer 183

1. define the term (Execution of final judgment is the methodology through which courts enforce a ruling.) 2. explain the term (There are various ways a court can execute a final judgment, depending on the remedies sought from that case and what the losing party must do. A garnishment allows the court to contact a party's employer to collect funds from a company paycheck. A sheriff's sale allows a court to repossess real estate and hold a public auction for it, such as a home. Voluntary compliance assumes that the party will comply with these efforts, but that is not always the case.) 3. cite a court case or hypothetical (idk!)

Answer 184

1. define the term (Discovery is a pretrial period in which the parties collect evidence to support their case. It is the longest and most expensive part of the trial process.) 2. explain the term (If a defendant is not complying with a request for information, the plaintiff can file a 'motion to compel discovery' to force them to do so. Discovery includes many different things. Each party has a series of 'interrogatories' that they can ask the other party during court. In the 'deposition,' you ask specific, pointed questions to gather as much information for the testimony as possible. Requests allow you to examine the evidence as well.) 3. cite a court case or hypothetical (In Professor Hollis' ongoing family case, the court initially only granted them 30 interrogatories. However, they argued that each member of their family was a different party in the case and were able to get more interrogatories for the case. In our clip from 'The Social Network,' the lawyer running the deposition for Eduardo Saverin had to ask specific questions regarding the reallocation of shares within Facebook. She asked the same question for each member, 'What was Sean Parker's share? What was Mark Zuckerburg's share? What was Eduardo Saverin's share?'. These tedious questions ensure to make depositions specific.)

Answer 185

1. define the term (The separation of powers is the 2. explain the term 3. cite a court case or hypothetical

Answer 186

1. define the term 2. explain the term 3. cite a court case or hypothetical

Answer 187

1. define the term 2. explain the term 3. cite a court case or hypothetical

Answer 188

1. define the term 2. explain the term 3. cite a court case or hypothetical

Answer 189

the Full Faith and Credit Clause

Exam #1 Flashcards

(259 cards)