BLAW Exam #1

When do Federal Question Jurisdiction come into play?

"Federal questions" cases in which the rights or obligations of a party are created or defined by some federal law

When do the federal courts have a say in subject matter in jurisdiction?

When a federal question is involved and when there is diversity of citizenship

When to "Diversity" cases come up with Jurisdiction?

When the parties are not from the same state, and the controversy is greater than $75,000

In the text of this chapter, we stated that the doctrine of stare decisis "became a cornerstone of the English and American judicial systems." What does stare decisis mean, and why has this doctrine been so fundamental to the development of our legal tradition?

A stare decisis is a common Law doctrine that makes judges follow the precedent established when making a decision. The two aspects of a stare decisis is that the judge should follow the precedents in making a decision unless given a reason not to do so, and decisions made in a higher court are binding on lower courts.

Which source of law takes priority in the following situations, and why? A) A federal statute conflicts with the U.S. Constitution. B) A federal statute conflicts with a state constitutional provision. C) A state statute conflicts with the common law of that state. D) A state constitutional amendment conflicts with the U.S. Constitution.

A) The U.S Constitution would take priority in this situation, because of the statutory law prohibiting it to. B) A Federal statute would take priority because a state cannot violate the constitution. C) The common law would overrule that state statute. D) The US constitution would overrule the state constitution.

Assume that Arthur Rabe is suing Xavier Sanchez for breaching a contract in which Sanchez promised to sell Rabe a painting by Vincent Van Gogh for $30 million. A) In this lawsuit, who is the plaintiff and who is the defendant? B) Suppose that Rabe wants Sanchez to perform the contract as promised. What remedy would Rabe seek from the court? C) Now suppose that Rabe wants to cancel the contract because Sanchez fraudulently misrepresented the painting as an original Van Gogh when in fact it is a copy. What remedy would Rabe seek? D) Will the remedy Rabe seeks in either situation be a remedy at law or a remedy in equity? What is the difference between legal and equitable remedies? E) Suppose that the trial court finds in Rabe's favor and grants one of these remedies. Sanchez then appeals the decision to a higher court. On appeal, which party will be the appellant (or petitioner), and which party will be the appellee (or respondent)?

A) Xavier Sanchez is the defendant, he is the party that is being sued. Arthur Rabe is the plaintiff in this lawsuit. B) Rabe would seek a petition since he wants an order from the judge. C) Rabe would now seek to file a complaint since he wants to be in courts at law and wants a judgment. D) Rabe would be a remedy at law in this situation since he is searching for a decree or an order from the judge. The difference of a remedy at law and a remedy in equity is the result of the court. It is either a judgment or an order. E) On the appeal, Sanchez will be the petitioner, and Rabe will be the respondent.

Legal Precedent

An interpretation of the law that a judge has made from a case, and passes a law for it. Each interpretation serves as a legal precedent that will surely be followed in future cases. It can be any decision made by a judge that involved facts or examples of authority.

Persuasive authority vs Binding authority

Binding authority is what the court must follow when there is a previous constitutional law, statute, or regulation guarding the issue. Persuasive authority is when there is no precedents that exist for an issue, so courts look at legal principles and policies from previous cases or existing statutes

What does Monetary Damages associate with?

Monetary Damages associates with Remedy of Law

A county court in Illinois is deciding a case involving an issue that has never been addressed before in that state's courts. The Iowa Supreme Court, however, recently decided a case involving a very similar fact pattern. Is the Illinois court obligated to follow the Iowa Supreme Court's decision on the issue? If the United States Supreme Court had decided a similar case, would that decision be binding on the Illinois court? Explain.

No, the Illinois court is not obligated to follow the Iowa Supreme Court's precedent if it does not think it is correct. The reason it is able to avoid this precedent is because it has not yet been addressed in the constitution. If the US Supreme Court were to reach this same issue, it would be able to overrule any decision since it hasn't been addressed in the US Supreme Court yet, therefore it wouldn't be a binding decision for the US Supreme court.

Under what circumstances might judges rely on a case law to determine the intent and purpose of a statute?

Since a case law is the judge's interpretation of a statute as well as constitutional provision and administrative rules, a judge might rely on common law (a judge-made law) as a guide for intent and purpose of a statute.

After World War II, several Nazis were convicted of "crimes against humanity" by an international court. Assuming that these convicted war criminals had not disobeyed any law of their country and had merely been following their government's orders, what law had they violated? Explain.

These criminals violated the natural law, considering that they were guilty of their crimes and should have been aware of their violation. The international adherents of natural law found them guilty considering they killed people and took them of their life. Also, natural law supersedes any type of law created by countries, including Germany's law at the time, which was the "povistivist law."