LEG 110- Week 5 Midterm Exam

LEG 110- Week 5 Midterm Exam
The king most involved in the development of the English common law was
Which of the following was a traditional characteristic of the English law courts?
Jim believes that it would be unfair to use information to which he had access based upon his position as an insider and to which the person on the other side of the stock trade did not have access. Since he believes that it would be immoral to use secret information to his own advantage, he endorses the approach taken by Congress under federal securities laws. To which jurisprudential school of thought would Jim belong?
When an appellate court remands a case, it
Which of the following statements regarding Katko v. Briney is true?
John was tired of having his lunch stolen from his locker at his place of employment. To get even with the thief, John armed the locker with explosives that would be triggered by the movement of the lunch bag. When triggered, the explosion seriously inured Tom, who had been taking the lunches for his own consumption. Which of the following statements is true?
One reason that vague criminal laws may be ruled unconstitutional is because they may authorize arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement. Even laws that are not vague, which seem straightforward and impartial, are often applied in an unfair manner because of the prejudices and biases of people participating in the justice system. The belief that the law is often applied in an arbitrary manner because of social realities is associated with what jurisprudential school of thought?
Metaethical scholars
In our modern society, which of the following is expected to play the lesser role in promoting ethical behavior?
Martin Luther King’s Birmingham Jail letter articulated which philosophical school of thought?
Ethicists study
Which of the following would evaluate a law that permitted the imposition of capital punishment based upon the concept of a universally accepted moral duty?
Traditionally, persons have not been required to intervene to come to the aid of another unless one of the following exists except:
The federal minimum wage law requires that most workers be paid at least $5.15 per hour. A governor of a small industrial state, in which the standard of living is considerably below national levels, perceives that some employers might be willing to hire more workers if the amount were lowered. In order to increase the general welfare of the citizens of this state, he proposes to the legislature a bill lowering the minimum wage in certain industries and especially for certain age groups. Such a state act would probably be declared unconstitutional because of
When the court decides that the place in which a contract is to be performed has more connection with the transaction than does the place in which the contract was made, the court would apply
A, an agent for Swish Toilet Bowl, Inc., a Delaware corporation that has its main office in San Francisco, California, agrees to fly with B, a potential customer from Reno, Nevada, to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where B maintains her place of business, a distributing corporation incorporated under the laws of New Jersey. While in flight, A and B come to an agreement and sign a contract while flying over Indiana. Performance of the contract will be carried out in Kentucky, where B has a warehouse and Swish has a factory. Swish refuses to carry out its part of the bargain, alleging that no contract exists because A was not acting within the scope of his authority as Swish’s agent. B brings suit for damages in Kentucky. What law will the Kentucky court apply if it uses the lex loci contractus approach?
In Gilmer v. Interstate Johnson Lane Corp., the U.S. Supreme Court held that federal age discrimination claims could be submitted to arbitration pursuant to arbitration agreements. Elizabeth Garfield brought suit against her former employer, Thomas McKinnon Securities, Inc., claiming that McKinnon had discharged her on account of her age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. McKinnon moved to dismiss the complaint and compel her arbitration because Garfield had agreed to arbitrate any controversy arising out of her employment. Garfield responded that she and all registered brokers are required to execute arbitration agreements as a condition of employment. She maintained that Congress did not intend to permit persons to waive their statutory right to sue ADEA violations in federal court via the execution of an arbitration agreement. With respect to Ms. Garfield’s case, Gilmer would be considered
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Gonzales v. Raitch that Congress was permitted by this provision of the U.S. Constitution to prohibit states from statutorily authorizing the cultivation and use of marijuana for medicinal purposes:
The problem with ex post facto laws is that they do all of the following except:
Which of the following statements is True?
Laaperi purchased a smoke detector manufactured by Black & Decker from Sears. One night, a short-circuit occurred in the Laaperi house and an electrical fire broke out. Because the circuit was shorted, the AC-operated smoke detector received no power and did not sound an alarm. As a result, the Laaperis suffered extensive personal injuries and property damages. Laaperi filed a product liability suit under state law. Assume that Black & Decker is incorporated in Delaware and has its principle place of business in Charlotte, North Carolina. Laaperi lives in North Carolina, which is where the fire occurred and the alarm system was purchased. In which court should the plaintiff file suit for alleged damages of over a million dollars?
The parties to a civil action can waive
A court can exercise personal jurisdiction over a corporation if the court is located in any of the following except:
Betty, a citizen of California, hits Bob with her automobile in Texas. It is her fault and involves a question of state, not federal law. Bob wants to bring a suit against Betty for $21,000 for personal injuries. Which court would have jurisdiction?
Which of the following statements about the U.S. Supreme Court is false?
Ruby is injured in a car accident, which was Bubba’s fault. She sued him for $150,000 alleging negligence, which involves a question of state law. Ruby is a citizen of North Carolina, while Bubba is a resident of Tennessee. The accident occurred while both were on vacation in Virginia. Which court could not have jurisdiction?
Nancy, a nurse, is summoned for jury duty in a medical malpractice case. She asserts under oath that she will not substitute her own judgment for the facts presented at trial and that she can render a fair and impartial verdict. Counsel for the defendant doctor, however, feels that she probably dislikes doctors and will not be prodefense. Counsel for the plaintiff likes Nancy and the judge believes that she can render a fair and impartial verdict. What should defense counsel do?
How could A’s attorney get the conversation between B and C, as well as the account books, into evidence?
Which of the following is not a pleading?
Cody brought suit for injuries sustained in an automobile collision between her car and the defendant Adkins pickup truck. The jury found that considering the hazardous weather conditions at the time of the accident, the defendant was not at fault or negligent in the operation of his vehicle and that the injuries that plaintiff sustained were the result of an unavoidable accident. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant Adkins. The plaintiff moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The judge should grant that motion if
Plaintiff sued a city college that terminated his employment without affording him a hearing on the grounds for his dismissal. The defendant college argued to the trial judge that since the plaintiff was an at-will employee without tenure, without a contract of employment, and without any promise of continued employment, he had no property interest in his continued employment and was not entitled to due process prior to dismissal. Before trial, the defendant college asked the judge to rule as a matter of law that it should prevail, since the fact of his at-will employment status was undisputed. If the trial judge believes that since he indeed had no reasonable expectation of continued employment, hence no property interest and no entitlement to constitutional due process, what should he do?
On the basis of the general rules of evidence and assuming that no exceptions to those rules apply, which of the following pieces of evidence will a judge not allow into court?
In what document should the gun manufacturer respond to Bob’s allegations by admitting some of Bob’s factual claims, denying others, and possibly establishing a defense of contributory negligence, that is, alleging that Bob was the primary cause of his injuries for negligently transporting a weapon?
Where the parties are of one interest and seek the same relief the case is
A brought suit against B in state court, saying that B had stolen an idea on which she had a patent. The court dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction over patent law actions. One year later, before the statute of limitations had run out, A again brought suit, but in federal court. Which of the following is a true statement?
The plaintiff brought suit in district court for injuries sustained when he fell off a bicycle rented from a resort. The plaintiff claimed that his injuries were caused because the defendant failed to maintain and inspect the bicycle’s brakes properly. The defendant moved for summary judgment on the basis of the preprinted rental agreement, signed by the plaintiff, which released the defendant from all liability arising from the rental. What will be the key issue in determining the validity of the exculpatory clause contained in the rental agreement?
Former Iranian hostages and two of their wives filed suit against the United States seeking compensation because the Algiers Accord, the agreement made between the president and Iran which secured their release, deprived them of the right to sue Iran for injuries sustained while being held hostage. The federal appeals court determined that the case involved a policy decision made during a crisis situation by the president and was not subject to judicial review. The court should refuse to adjudicate this dispute based on
Peter filed a suit against St. Paul Church. Before trial the church offered Peter $10,000 to settle the claim outside of court. Peter accepted the money. Peter and the church agreed that the trial should take place even though neither would consider the results binding. Peter wants to find out if he would have won and what amount of damages the jury would have come up with. The church wants the court to define the limits of charitable immunity. What should the court do under these circumstances?
If a court has concluded that a lawsuit has been brought prematurely, it will dismiss the action because of this problem
Which of the following disputes should an American court decline to hear on the basis of the act of state doctrine?