Business

In 1980 Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act. In 2008 Congress passed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. Which of these is/are a stature

• The Sherman Antitrust Act

• The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act

• Both

• Non of the above

Answer explanation

Witten laws passed by legislative bodies like Congress are statutes

Paul Plaintiff sues Donna Defendant in a tort case. He accuses her of running a stop sign and hitting his car and seeks damages to compensate him for his losses. Paul’s case will be a ______. In this case, Pau’s burden of proof will be to prove his case _______________

• Civil; by preponderance of the evidence

• Civil; beyond a reasonable doubt

• Criminal; by preponderance of the evidence

• Criminal; beyond a reasonable doubt

Answer explanation

Private cases between private people or companies are civil lawsuits. In such cases, plaintiffs must present enough evidence to prove their claims true by a preponderance of the evidence

Ron loses his discrimination claim in federal district court. If he wishes he can appeal his case to ___________ court. If he loses there he can seek to have his case reviewed by ___________

• a general trial court; his state's supreme court

• a general trial court; the U.S. Supreme Court

• A U.S. Court of Appeals; his state's supreme court

• A U.S. Court of Appeals; the U.S. Supreme Court

Answer explanation

Appeals from a federal court district court would proceed to a federal appellate court and eventually perhaps to the U.S. Supreme Court although the Supreme Court grants only a relatively small percentage of requests for writs of certiorari

Consider Abner v. Doubleday, a case that will be heard by a U.S. Court of Appeals. Which of the following can you say is true

• Abner was the plaintiff in the original lawsuit brought to district court

• Abner is bringing the appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals

• Abner was the defendant in the original lawsuit brought to district count

• Both A and B are definitely true

• None of the above are definitely true

Answer explanation

Abner might have been either the plaintiff or the defendant originally. But since Abner is listed first for an appellate case Abner is the side bringing the appeal

Adam sues Brenda and claims that Brenda’s dog bit his leg. Brenda receives a copy of Adam’s complaint and in her answer, she alleges that her dog bit Adam when he was trespassing in her yard late at night that he destroyed her fence when he ran away from the dog and he should pay $500 to compensate her for the fence repairs. Characterize the components of Brenda’s answer

• A. It contains a denial

• B. it contains a defense

• C. it contains a counterclaim

• D. A and C

• E. B and C

Answer explanation

She does not deny that Adam’s claim of a dog bite is true. She asserts instead that there exists a legal justification for the bite. So she raises a defense and does not make a denial. And, by asking for money to repair the fence, she raises a counterclaim

Sam sues AlphaCom. His former employees. In his case, he alleges that AlphaCo is illegally discriminating against him. During discovery, Sam’s lawyer asks AlphaCo for its employment records over the last 10 years. The lawyer also wants to talk to Sam’s former supervisor under oat and ask him about Sam’s termination

• interrogatory; interrogatory

• interrogatory; deoposition

• request for production of documents; interrogatory

• request for production of documents; deposition

Answer explanation

The demand for business records is a request for the production of documents. The questioning of the supervisor will be a deposition because the lawyer will be talking to him in person, and not by submitting a written request for information which would be an interrogatory.

Max sues the Houston Police Department after he is arrested during a protest. He claims his free speech rights under the U.S. Constitution have been violated

Jack sues MegaCorp over crop losses after MegaCorp dumps toxic chemicals into a river that eventually runs across his farm. He uses based on the federal clean water Act and also under Texas tort law

Which of these two plaintiffs could bring their case to federal court

• Max

• Jack

• Both Max and Jack

• None of the above

Answer explanation

Max’s case is based on the federal constitution so it is in. And although Jack’s lawsuit is based on other state and federal law, since one of his claims raises a federal question a federal court would also have subject matter jurisdiction over his case

Max a resident of Texas sues the Houston Police Department after he is arrested during a protest. He claims his free speech rights under U.S. Constitution have been violated. He seeks $50,000. Can he bring his claim to federal court?

• Yes

• No

• Both Yes and No

• None of the above

Answer explanation

Answer A. Don’t be too distracted by the above or below $75,000 issue. The number of dollars involved is relevant only in a diversity of citizenship situation. Max can sue no matter how much he is seeking because his case is based on federal law and jurisdiction is based on a federal question. Had Max’s suit been a claim based on state law, he could successfully file in federal court only if he and the defendant were citizens of different states and more than $75,000 was at stake

Paul plaintiff, a resident of Texas, files a lawsuit in Texas against Don Defendant, a resident of California. Don receives notice of the lawsuit and tells his lawyer, “I don’t want to travel to Texas to be sued by this guy.” Don’s Lawyers says, “Maybe you don’t have to.” The lawyer argues that the Texas court lacks personal jurisdiction over Don. Don’s lawyer asserts in a court filing that the court does have personal jurisdiction and that the case should not proceed. He does not say anything else about the case in the filings

Don’s lawyer has filed a ______ This action ______ gives the Texas court personal jurisdiction over Don.

• appearance; does

• appearance; does not

• special appearance; does

• special appearance; does not

Answer explanation

Don’s lawyer has limited his claim to a lack of jurisdiction and so it counts only as a special appearance and is not considered a formal step to defend a lawsuit

Paul Plaintiff, a resident of Texas, files a lawsuit and tells his lawyer, “I don’t want to travel to Texas to be sued by this guy.” Don’s Layer says, “Maybe you don’t have to.” the Lawyer argues that the Texas court lacks personal jurisdiction over Don. Pual's lawyer asserts that the court does have personal jurisdiction and that the case should proceed.

Six months before. Don traveled to Texas, signed a contract with Paul while he was there, and returned to California. He has made no other trips to Texas and has had no other interactions with the state.

In Paul’s lawsuit, he alleges that Don has breached that contract. Which of the following types of personal jurisdiction does the Texas court have over Don?

• A. General personal jurisdiction

• B. Specific personal jurisdiction

• C. Both A and B

• None of the agove

Answer explanation

Don goes in a specific act (signing the contract) in the forum state (Texas), and the lawsuit arises out of that specific act. Don has no long-term presence in Texas or regular Texas activities, so there is no general personal jurisdiction.