Kelley School of Business - L201 Exam 1

The Supreme Court is mainly an ____ court.

Appellate (meaning it only questions the law of the federal court of appeals and the highest state courts).

Separation of Powers

The U.S. Constitution established Congress and allows it to make laws in certain areas, the president to enforce the laws, and a federal judiciary to interpret them.

Federalism

Gives states power to make laws in certain areas

Statutes

laws created by elected representatives in Congress or a state legislation, their interpretation and application are often difficult.

Uniform Acts

model statutes drafted by private bodies of scholars and lawyers.

Common Law

1) law made and applied by judges (precedents)

2) typically only used at state level, although sometimes federal courts apply it

3) "Stare Decisis" or "let the decision stand"

Administrative Agencies...

obtain the ability to make law through a delegation of power from legislature. Their decisions are legally binding but appeals to the legislation are sometimes allowed

treaties

"supreme law of the land" made by president and other governments and must be approved by 2/3 of senate

Rules of Supremacy?

1) U.S Constitution > State Constitution

2) Constitutions > Other Laws

3) Statutes > Legislative Delegation

4) Statutes > Common Law

4) Federal Statute > State Statute (This is known as the SUPREMACY CLAUSE)

Substantive Law

sets the rights and duties of people as they act in society.

Procedural Law

controls the behavior of government bodies as they establish and enforce rules of substantive law

4 schools of jurisprudence and description of each

1) Legal Positivism- sees legal validity and moral validity as separate... laws should be enforced and obeyed, just or not

2) Natural Law- good law=just, bad law=not just

3) American Legal Realism- what really affects peoples lives is true law

4) Sociological (Public Policy)- what would people want to happen?

Judicial Review

questions constitutionality of laws (established during Marbury vs Madison)

How do judges determine the plain meaning of statutes?

They use the dictionary

6 functions of law?

1) peacekeeping

2) checking gmt. power and promoting personal freedom

3) facilitating planning and the realization of reasonable expectations

4) promoting economic growth via free comp.

5) promoting social justice

6) protecting the environment

Maxims

general rules of thumb employed in statutory interpretation

Subject Matter Jurisdiction

a court's power to decide the type of dispute involved in the case (ex: criminal courts cant hear civil matters, small claims courts can't hear $500,000)

In Personam Jurisdiction

based on the residence, location, or activities of the defendant. a state has in personam jurisdiction over a defendant who is a citizen or resident of the state, who are within state border when the process is served, or who consent to the court's authority (i.e. entering the state to defend the plaintiff's claim).

In Rem Jurisdiction

Court jurisdiction over a defendant's property (ex: fighting over property in Indiana, Indiana would hear the case)

Venue Requirements that are satisfied

A court must have this for a case to be legally binding. This questions where the case will be held. (ex: if there's a school shooter at IU, they will try to get the case moved to another state to get a fair trial)

Concurrent Jurisdiction

when both state and federal courts have jurisdiction over the case.

>When concurrent jurisdiction exists and plaintiff files for state court, defendant has the option to "remove" the case to a federal court.

The U.S Supreme Court

-highest court of the land

-mainly functions as an appellate court

-has certiorari jurisdiction (gives them the option to hear a case or not)

Appeals from the highest state courts are within Supreme Court's jurisdiction when

1) a treaty/federal statute has been questioned

2) state statute conflicts with federal law

3) Any title, right, privilege, or immunity is claimed under federal law

***You cannot appeal to the supreme court, you have to be granted writ of certiorari

What is original jurisdiction? When does Supreme Court have it?

-right to hear case first (Supreme Court acts as a trial court when they have this)

-cases involving foreign ambassadors, ministers, etc, cases in which a state proceeds against aliens or citizens of the U.S., and controversies between a state and the federal law.

>They WANT to hear these cases

If a case involves parties between 2+ states, what type of jurisdiction does the Supreme Court have?

original AND exclusive

Preponderance of evidence

to win a civil case, the plaintiff must prove each elements of their claim by a preponderance of evidence- which means that they must prove greater evidence (i.e. if the jury thinks the plaintiff is 50.1% right, they win the case)

*plaintiff has the burden of proof

shadow of doubt and reasonable doubt are ___.

NOT THE SAME

What does a judge do if they don't have statutes?

They use precedents (stare decisis) or equity (fairness)

Moot

there are no more material/relevant issues left to decide in the case (ex: settlement cases will always be moot)

Ripe

Means the case is ready to go to court (ex: if you go to court to counter a bill and not a statute, your case would not be ripe)

Standing

Questions if the plaintiff has a direct/tangible interest in the outcome of the case. If they do not, they don't have a standing, and are known to be an officious intermeddler.

Diversity Jurisdiction

-type of jurisdiction for a federal court

-has to be worth $75,000+ and involve 2+ states

Federal Question Jurisdiction

has to involve federal "Stuff" (executive orders, administrative decisions, etc.) don't have a required amount associated with it because they WANT to hear these cases.

Removal Jurisdiction

Removing from state to federal court if they have jurisdiction.

*the defendant gets it moved because it's not where they want it. (Ex: NYC boy goes against small town Indy girl plaintiff... he is going to want to get it removed to a federal district, but can only do so if it is worth $75,000+)

Hierarchy of Structure Jurisdiction

an inferior court is not a court of record- this is important because you can only appeal from a court of record (ex: traffic courts aren't courts of record)

Summons/Due Process

-Summons notifies defendant that they are getting sued

-Due Process guarantees the defendant is properly notified

The Pleadings

documents parties file with the court when they first state their respective claims and defenses. This includes:

*the complaint

*the answer

*Sometimes... the reply

Motion to Dismiss/12(b)(6) or "So What":

-the procedural device for ending the case at an early stage.

-can occur if:

1)failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, "so what"

2)inadequate service of process

3) lack of jurisdiction

-the defendant wins the case

Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings

normally occurs after the pleadings have been completed... tells the judge to "judge it"

Summary Judgement/Rule 56

-a device for disposing of relatively clear cases without a trial.

-Differs from demurrer because it requires factual determinations.

-To move for a summary judgement, the party must show that:

*there is no genuine issue of material fact

*they are entitled to judgement as a matter of law (i.e. uses law to prove she will win)

Process of a trial:

>Occurs after the case has been through discovery and survived motions

1) Voir Dire- pre-trial screening conference where biased potential jurors may be removed for cause, or each attorney is allowed a limited number of peremptory challenges, which allow him to remove potential jurors without having to show bias or other cause.

2) Attorneys make opening statements

3) call witnesses and introduce documentary evidence

>When the plaintiff's attorney asks witnesses questions it is known as direct examination.

>When the defendant's attorney asks witnesses questions it is known as cross examination.

4) Attorneys make closing arguments

5) Issues instructions- set forth the legal rules if applicable to the case

6) judge submits case to the jury (if applicable)

7) jury deliberates to reach a verdict

Directed Verdict

Takes the case away from the jury and provides a judgment to one party before the jury gets a chance to decide the case.

>may be made by either party

>Usually occurs after the other party has presented their evidence

>asserts that the evidence leads to only one result and need not be considered by the jury

Judgement not withstanding the verdict (JNOV)

the device for when one party wins a judgement even after the jury has reached a verdict against that party; usually cannot happen unless the moving party previously moved for a directed verdict.

-judges hate this because it questions legal system and calls jury stupid, yet it is an option for the plaintiff after the judge gives a verdict.

Structure of State and Federal Courts:

STATE COURTS:

Trial Court- has trials

Appellate Court- only look at record for procedural or substantive errors

State Supreme Court

FEDERAL COURTS:

District (the federal level trial court)

Circuit

Supreme

Process for a civil case:

1) Jury Selection Phase- attorneys pick who they want on jury (using legal realism)

2) Opening Statement- plaintiff opens

3) Witnesses and Cases

4) Plaintiff rests >the defendant now has the option for a motion for a directed verdict, which is made possible if the plaintiff didn't carry the burden of proof.

5) Defendant presents their case

6) Witnesses- plaintiff can cross examine

7) Defense Resents

8) plaintiff can ask for a directed verdict (although it is rarely granted)

9) Closing Statements

10) Judge gives a verdict

Motion for Default Judgement

defendant doesn't show up

Res Judicata

A judge doesn't have to hear your case again

Ordinary Prudence

the typical, reasonable amount of care a normal person would give.

4 elements of negligence

1) The defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff

2) The defendant committed a breach of this duty

3) This breach was the actual and proximate cause of injury experienced by the plaintiff

-Proximate Cause: was there a foreseeable risk or result?

-Cause in Fact: uses but for test, which questions if the plaintiff would've been harmed if it weren't for the defendant.

4) There is some sort of injury whether it be mental, physical, or to property.

due care and due diligence

related to duty (negligence)

-due care: showing proper concern for welfare of others

-due diligence: showing proper attention in the circumstance

2nd restatement of torts

>Intervening, Supervening, or Superseding Cause- the criminal actions of a third party cuts off the liability of an otherwise negligent defendant, unless those criminal actions are foreseeable.

(ex: guy throws bottle off of building, lady trips, which causes someone to lose their dog, ....)

Negligence per se elements

*negligence is assumed, negligence per se tries to determine whether it proximately caused damage to the plaintiff.

1) Statute or statute-like (ex: ordinance)

2) needs a breach or violation of the statute

3) plaintiff within the group of people that statute aims to protect

4) injury- statutes trying to prevent

*If these 4 things are proven, the defendant is said to be negligent, and the court should grant a motion for a directed verdict against the defendant.

Res Ipsa Loquitur elements

the thing speaks for itself; way to prove negligence

Applies when:

1) the defendant has exclusive control of the instrumentality of harm

2) the harm that occurred would not ordinarily occur int he absence of negligence

3) the plaintiff was in no way responsible for his own injury.

*When these are proven, it creates a rebuttal presumption that the defendant is negligent, and a motion for a directed verdict should be issued.

Common Examples- airplane crash, medical malpractice

Special Rules of Causation (4)

1) Eggshell Rule- Take your victims as you find them (if they have a pre-existing condition that you make worse via negligence, you are responsible for the damages)

2) Negligence Invites Rescue- heroes get paid too

3) Negligence Invites Escape- people trying to escape get paid

4) weakened Condition- if you are in a weakened condition because of the defendant's negligence, they are responsible

Emotional Distress with Negligence- Evolution of Rules, 3rd Party Rule

Old Rule: impact rule (no emotional distress compensation unless you were impacted)

New Rule: physical manifestation or mental trauma (PTSD, twitches, seizures, hyperventilation)

Newest Rule: doctor statement showing emotional distress (has to be serious- PTSD, etc.)

3rd Party Rule: has to be severe emotional distress, it had to be a close family member, and you had to perceive it as it was happening.

Outline Contributory Negligence as a defense to negligence

1) plaintiff isn't using due care and due diligence

2) if proven, plaintiff could possibly not get any money

3) all courts use res ipsa loquiter (would the accident have happened if it weren't for the negligence of the defendant?)

Outline Assumption of Risk as a defense to negligence

1) Plaintiff puts themselves in harms way willingly

2) 2 basic elements (it is voluntarily given, and intelligently given- therefore kids 10 and under cannot assume a risk, or legally insane people)

Comparative negligence

Pure: uses a percentage to allocate damage amounts. If plaintiff is 40% at fault, they pay 40%, and vise versa.

Mixed: If plaintiff is over 50% responsible, they get nothing, if lower, courts use pure comparative negligence.

Exculpatory Clause

a waiver- courts hate these because it promotes negligent behavior.

definitely won't work for gross negligence or recklessness

gross negligence

an extreme lack of due care/diligence under the circumstances. (ex: instructor gives 5-year-olds numchucks at martial arts practice and leaves)

*usually used in cases where an exculpatory clause was signed

recklessness

conscious disregard for a known high degree of probable harm to another (ex: driving down 10th street at noon and texting)

-only defense to this is assumption of risk

Strict Liability

if you engage in certain activities and someone gets injured, you are strictly liable.

Ex: wild animals, ultrahazardous activities (oil, nuclear, dangerous chemicals, etc.)

What is a tort and what are the 4 types?

- a civil wrong that is not a breach of contract

1) Intentional torts (the desire to cause certain consequences- ex: slander, libel, false imprisonment)

2) Recklessness: indifference to a known harm

3) Negligence: failure to use reasonable care, causing harm

4) Strict Liability: liability without fault

**preponderance of evidence, not a reasonable doubt

compensatory damages vs punitive damages

compensatory- less severe

punitive- goes so far as to punish defendant

Battery

the intentional and harmful or offensive touching of another without his consent.

Intent Required:

-intent to cause harmful or offensive contact

-intent to cause apprehension that such contact is imminent

(ex: someone brings their dog into work and you kick it- both you and the company can be sued for battery)

Transferred Intent

defendant intends to harm one individual, but unintentionally harms a second person

Assault

intentionally attempting or threatening to touch a person's body without the person's consent

-same intent elements as battery, however, assault stresses APPREHENSION (person thinking "I'm about to be hit")

*you don't have to be afraid to be a victim of battery/assault.

(ex: "Im gonna beat your ass as soon as you step outside" >assault W/O battery)

False Imprisonment

1) Confinement- no reasonable means of escape

2) Appreciable amount of time (1-2 mins)

3) Without Consent

*you have to have knowledge of your confinement to sue (i.e. you can't be asleep)

Ex: frat hazes and makes boys take clothes off, leaves door unlocked, and says they'll be back in 2 hours. Can they sue for false imprisonment?

>Yes, it's a harm to their dignity

Merchant Rule

1) Reasonable Belief

2) Reasonable time

3) Reasonable Manner (you cannot strip search, tackle, grab a pregnant woman, etc.)

If it's a kid...

>Call his parents (if he's 10 and under, he can't consent)

Actual Malice

Either knowledge of a defamatory statement's falsity or a reckless disregard for the truth.

>Public Officials can't sue for defamation, they have to sue for Actual Malice

Defamation definition and elements.

-publication of untrue facts that hurts the reputation of the plaintiff.

Criteria:

1) 1+ person other than plaintiff (publication)

2) has to be un-true

3) Statement of Fact (would a reasonable person think the statement has some base-in-fact?)

*you can't defame the dead or a group of people

Slander vs Libel

Slander: spoken defamation

Libel: written, graphic, etc. defamation (seen as worse because it is permanent)

In slander, what do you have to prove?

Monetary lose/actual damages (losing a job, business opportunities, employees, etc.)

Slander Per Se and 4 examples

-slander so bad that damages are presumed

1) Serious Crime (long sentencing- rape, murder, etc.)

2) Loathsome Disease (HIV, ebola, etc.)

3) Serious Sexual Misconduct (pedophilia, necrophilia, etc.)

4) Professional Incompetence

Privileges for Defamation:

Conditional:

-statements made to protect or further legitimate interests of another (ex: job reference)

-statements made to promote a common interest

-fair comment

Absolute:

-Court

-Spousal

-Congress

WHY? >We want a free flow of information

Media:

-has absolute privilege for 2 categories- public figure and public officials (defined as one who thrusts themselves into the spotlight)

4 types of invasion of privacy

1. intrusion on solitude/seclusion (physical or non-physical, searching home, tapping telephone)

2. publicizing private matters (info about sex life, not paying bills, etc.)

3. publicizing in a false light (signing a person's name to a public letter they don't believe in)

*for this you need widespread dissemination

4. appropriation of name/likeness (using one's name to endorse a product)

(ex: woman in Stanford campus, guy asks for a photo, he photoshops her face to a naked body and posts it online > he can be sued for false light and appropriation of name and likeness)

disparagement

corporate/business defamation

*requires monetary damages (business opportunities, government subsidies, etc.)