LEB320f Bredeson Practice Questions and Ft. Cases

Ft. Case - False Imprisonment WALMART STORES, INC. v. COCKRELL

"We conclude that these facts are sufficient to support the jury's finding that Cockrell was willfully detained without his consent." We conclude that a rational jury could have found that Navarro did not "reasonably believe" a theft had occurred and therefore lacked authority to detain Cockrell. We therefore hold that when a store employee has probable cause to arrest a person for shoplifting, the employee may do so and make a contemporaneous search of the person and objects within that person's immediate control. The contemporaneous search is limited to instances in which a search of the body is reasonably necessary to investigate ownership of property believed stolen. Accordingly Navarro's contemporaneous search was unreasonable in scope, because he had no probable cause to believe that Cockrell had hidden any merchandise under the bandage

In Podias v. Mairs, why were Swanson and Newell no longer granted summary judgment claiming they were not under legal duty to act?

"reasonable jury could find defendants breached a duty which proximately caused the victim's death" by not moving him to the side of the road, by not calling 911, and because Swanson and Newell had a relationship to the plaintiff.

Review of Key Ideas from Ft. Case: PODIAS V. MAIRS

- who was being sued? The passengers in a car involved in an accident. The driver's role in this fatality was clear, but this case addresses whether legal responsibility can be stretched to cover the passengers as well. - the lower court granted a summary judgment and dismissed the plaintiff's case. - The appellate (higher) court disagreed, and Judge Parillo cited several reasons for why liability might extend to the passengers in the car. - The case was remanded, or sent back to the lower court for further proceedings. can we tell who ultimately won the case? That is, can we tell whether the passengers are in fact legally liable for the fatality? - No. Since the case was remanded, unless the case settles or the plaintiff gives up on their case, the plaintiff will get his chance to present arguments to a jury. - The jury might or might not find in plaintiff's favor. The plaintiff has essentially won the right to have his day in court.

Ft Case 32 - Covenants not to Compete SYSTEMS AND SOFTWARE INC v. BARNES

--Barnes signed a non-complete --Barnes leaves voluntarily leaves and starts similar business with wife -- court will only enforce restrictive constraints to the degree necessary to protect the interest of the employer "We do not find these arguments persuasive, particularly in the context of this case, which does not present any of the hallmarks of an unequal bargaining relationship between employer and employee." " the evidence supports the trial court's findings and conclusions, which, in turn, support its decision to enforce the agreement to the extent that Barnes is prohibited for a six-month period from working for Utility Solutions or any other direct competitor of SSI" - Covenants not to compete - Plaintiff, Systems and Software, Inc. hired Barnes as an employee in which he signed a non-competition agreement in 2002 - In 2004, Barnes left the job and started a partnership with his wife called Spirit Technologies Consulting Group - The only customer was Utility Solutions, Inc. - Trial court held for SSI and prohibited Barnes from working as a consultant with Utility Solutions or any other direct competitor of SSI for six months

Featured Case - Relationship between Law and Ethics PODIAS V. MAIRS 926 A.2d 859 (N.J.App. 2007)

1. This case is a wrongful death action authorized by state statute to allow close relatives of deceased persons to sue those whose wrongful acts have contributed to a death. 2. In a civil case like this one, a jury is normally the judge of the facts. The jury examines the evidence and determines what it thinks actually happened. It is the task of the jury to decide whether the evidence is sufficient to prove the plaintiff's asserted facts by a preponderance of the evidence. 3. The trial judge decides the law. - Summary judgment is appropriately granted if the evidence in the case so clearly indicates that factually one side or the other is entitled to prevail that a trial would be a waste of time. - The featured case involves a situation in which the trial judge granted a summary judgment for the defendant To establish liability, such relationships need not be limited to those where a preexisting duty exists, or involving economic ties, or dependent on the actor's status as, for instance, a landowner or business owner. Rather, it may only be necessary "to find some definite relation between the parties of such a character that social policy justifies the imposition of a duty to act." we are satisfied that a reasonable jury could find defendants breached a duty which proximately caused the victim's death. In the first place, the risk of harm, even death, to the injured victim lying helpless in the middle of a roadway, from the failure of defendants to summon help or take other precautionary measures was readily and clearly foreseeable. Not only were defendants aware of the risk of harm created by their own inaction, but were in a unique position to know of the risk of harm posed by Mairs' own omission in that regard, as well as Mairs' earlier precipatory conduct in driving after having consumed alcohol. Even absent any encouragement on their part, defendants had special reason to know that Mairs would not himself summon help, but instead illegally depart the scene of a hit-and-run accident, the imposition of a duty upon defendants does not offend notions of fairness and common decency and is in accord with public policy. As evidenced by the grant of legislative immunity to volunteers afforded by the Good Samaritan Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:62A-1, public policy encourages gratuitous assistance by those who have no legal obligation to render it. Praet, supra. Simply and obviously, defendants here were far more than innocent bystanders or strangers to the event. Defendants therefore bear some relationship not only to the primary wrongdoer but to the incident itself. It is this nexus which distinguishes this case from those defined by mere presence on the scene without more, and therefore implicates policy considerations simply not pertinent to the latter. B. [The court then examined the facts and determined that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find defendants liable for negligence because they had aided and abetted Mairs' wrongful post-accident conduct by not acting reasonably under the circumstances to assist Podias, such as calling 911.]

Which of the following is not a circumstance which courts will often take into account when deciding what reasonable people in the circumstances probably would have intended regarding a contract? a. Evidence from the conduct of a party that is not engaged in the same trade. b. Evidence from the conduct of the parties both before and after the alleged agreement was made. c. A well-established custom in the industry in which the parties are members, assuming that the parties have not stated otherwise in their transaction. d. Evidence of a custom that these parties may have established between themselves.

A

All laws are rooted in moral standards.

False - Many laws are laws of convenience, custom, or made for other reasons.

Alan buys a new laptop at Best Buy for $600. Betty buys an acre of land for $6,000. Carol signs up for a year of cable TV service, and pre-pays $600. Which of these agreements will be governed by Article Two of the Uniform Commercial Code? A. Alan's only B. Betty's only C. Carol's only D. A and B

A. Alan's only

In the featured case Leonard v. PepsiCo, recall that Leonard saw a television ad in which a student landed a Harrier Jet at his high school, and a subtitle indicated that the cost of the jet was "7 million Pepsi Points". The plaintiff then sought to acquire 7 million Pepsi Points and to require Pepsi to hand over the plane. The appellate court decided that... A. Pepsi had not made an offer, and no contract existed. B. Leonard had not accepted the offer, and no contract existed. C. There was no consideration to support deal, so no contract existed. D. A contract existed, and Pepsi was obligated to acquire a Harrier Jet for Leonard. E. A contract existed, and Leonard was entitled to damages but not a Harrier Jet.

A. Pepsi had not made an offer, and no contract existed.

Which of the following is not a classification of a trademark? a. Accurate. b. Arbitrary. c. Descriptive. d. Generic.

A. accurate

Roger shows up at his friend Fred's house. Fred did not invite him over, but Fred is glad to see him, and the two sit down to watch a baseball game. Later, Roger uses a bathroom at Fred's house, and he receives an electrical shock from a light switch. Fred knew that the switch was badly wired, because his cousin received a shock from the same switch last week. Did Fred have a legal duty to warn Roger about the faulty switch? A. Yes B. No

ANSWER A - Roger is a licensee. As such, Fred is obligated to warn Roger about hidden dangers on his property if Fred has actual knowledge of them.

After a long day of creating online course materials, Prentice and Bredeson have a fender-bender in the faculty parking lot. They briefly consider fighting, but they soon realize that neither is particularly good at fighting, so they decide to sue each other instead. At trial, the evidence shows that at the time of the accident, Prentice was behind the wheel eating a cheeseburger and fiddling with his radio, and that Bredeson was talking on two cell phones. The jury concludes that the wreck was 60% Bredeson's fault and 40% Prentice's fault. Bredeson will recover 40% of his losses in which type of system? A. pure comparative negligence B. modified comparative negligence C. both A and B D. none of the above

ANSWER A Bredeson gets nothing in either type of modified system bc he is over half at fault bredeson can recover 40% of his losses in a pure comparative system

Sue rents a Segway scooter. While riding around downtown, she spots her arch enemy Archie, who is standing on a sidewalk facing away from her and looking at his phone. Sue grimaces, sets her shoulders, and accelerates to the Segway's top speed of 5 miles per hour. With a look of pure rage, she zeroes in on Archie, who is still looking at his phone and scrolling through an endless stream of nothing in particular. Eventually, Sue reaches Archie and runs into him from behind, knocking him down to the sidewalk. Archie never saw it coming. In the fall, he breaks his wrist. What torts has Sue committed? A. Assault B. Battery C. Both A and B

ANSWER B - Since Archie was never afraid, Sue has not committed assault. But, since she deliberately acted and caused a harmful bodily contact, she has committed battery.

EXAMPLE Tina has a dispute with her next-door neighbor. The neighbor's tree fell over onto her garage roof and caused significant damage. The neighbor has been slow to agree to pay for the damage. Tina says, "I'd like to work this out quickly, and I hope that I can still be friends with my neighbor later - it would be awkward to live next door to someone who is angry with me." Based on Tina's comments, she should start with which of the following? A. A trial B. An arbitration C. A mediation

ANSWER C mediation will help her meet her desires for a faster resolution that is more likely to allow the parties to move past the dispute and coexist peacefully

Billy, age 10, walks into a baseball card shop and tells the owner that he has an Aaron Judge rookie card. The owner offers to pay Billy $25 for the card if he brings it by tomorrow. Billy says, "It's a deal," shakes the owner's hand, and leaves. Select the correct descriptive terms from the pairs below that apply to this deal. unilateral -or- bilateral valid -or- voidable -or- void express -or- implied executed -or- executory governed by common law principles -or- governed by UCC principles

ANSWER: This is a bilateral (promise for a promise), voidable (because Billy is a minor and can back out of it), express (stated), executory (unfinished) contract governed by UCC principles (because a baseball card is a thing or a "good").

Carl challenges a statute under his 14th Amendment right to equal protection. He argues that the law makes distinctions based upon race, and that it must be struck down. The court will apply ______________scrutiny to the claim. If it wishes to keep the law in place, the government will have to convince the court that it is necessary to further a(n) ______________ state interest. A. strict; compelling B. strict; important C. intermediate; compelling D. intermediate; important

ANSWER: A. When a law makes distinctions based on race, courts will apply strict scrutiny. That standard requires that states demonstrate a compelling interest if they wish to seek to have the challenged law remain in place.

Max, a resident of Texas, 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. He seeks $50,000. Can he bring his claim to federal court? A. Yes B. No

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 his 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.

Vince proposes to hire Donny to mow his lawn once a week over the summer for $40 per week. The two sign an agreement to that effect. Vince is the _____________ in this relationship, and Vince __________ need to have capacity for the arrangement to be valid. A. principal; does B. principal; does not C. agent; does D. agent; does not

ANSWER: A. As the employer, Vince is the principal, and as such he must have capacity. Donny, who will work on Vince's behalf, is the agent

Rick, when he was 16 years old, bought a used car from Car World for $5,000. He drove the car for a year and put 15,000 miles on the odometer. He was also involved in a minor accident. At age 17, Rick wants to disaffirm the contract with Car World and get a full $5,000 refund. Car World objects. Its owner says, "Look, the car has higher miles that it did last year, and even if it wasn't damaged from the wreck, I could only sell it for $4,000. And with the damage on top of the higher miles, I can't sell it for more than $3,000. And besides, I sold this car more than a year ago - I shouldn't have to issue any refund at all." What refund should Rick receive if a court applies the rule that is applicable in most states? A. $5,000 B. $4,000 C. $3,000 D. $0

ANSWER: A. In a most states the minor is entitled to the full amount that he or she paid without any deduction for damage or depreciation, even if a contract is fully executed.

One more time with our basic story, this time with some additional backstory. 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 lawyer says, "Maybe you don't have to." The lawyer argues that the Texas court lacks personal jurisdiction over Don. Paul's lawyer asserts that the court does have personal jurisdiction, and that the case should proceed. Six months before, Don travelled 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 D. None of the above

ANSWER: B. Don engaged 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, and so there is no general personal jurisdiction.

According to an example in the module, in the 1990s, leaders at Sears Auto Centers set aggressive goals that caused many Sears employees to widely overcharge for work and to perform unnecessary repairs. Other similar examples involved Washington Mutual and Wells Fargo. The problem at the heart of the companies' troubles was... A. Failure to adopt a code of ethics B. Improperly structured compensation C. A lack of effective ethics training D. None of the above

ANSWER: B. Each company put compensation structures in place that incentivized wrongful behavior by employees.

Vince goes to a baseball game. The back of his ticket says, "team is not liable for injuries in the stands." Vince has a few beers, and taunts the shortstop throughout the game. Late in the game, Vince says something very unpleasant about the shortstop's mother. The shortstop drops his glove, charges into the stands, and beats Vince senseless. When Vince gets out of the hospital, he sues the team. The team wants to escape liability, and points out that their exculpatory clause on the back of Vince's ticket covers this kind of thing. Will a court likely enforce the exculpatory clause and prevent Vince from seeking damages? yes or no?

ANSWER: B. Even though this is a recreational activity, exculpatory clauses only cover negligence, and not intentional wrongful acts. Vince can go ahead with his lawsuit.

Milton Friedman argued that corporations are agents of _______________ . He _______________ argue that corporations should be socially responsive. A. capital; would B. capital; would not C. society; would D. society; would not

ANSWER: B. Friedman was a leading advocate of the idea that companies do not owe duties to society, and that corporate leaders should make decisions in such a way as maximize shareholder wealth.

Tom discovers a new type of tree while exploring deep in a forest on a remote island. No one appears to have used it for anything before, and Tom would like exclusive rights to sell the wood. Sarah creates a new wood-like product in her lab. It is substantially stronger than any known natural wood. Can Tom and Sarah obtain patents that will cover their respective discoveries? A. Tom can receive a patent B. Sarah can receive a patent C. Both Tom and Sarah can receive a patent D. Neither Tom nor Sarah will receive a patent

ANSWER: B. Newly created substances are patentable, but naturally occurring substances are not.

Ann Agent works for Pete Principal. Pete tells her, "Drive the company truck up to Dallas, pick up a shipment of widgets from Alpha Co, and bring them back to Austin." As Ann is driving the company truck up to Dallas, it runs low on gas. Ann fills up the tank. Is Pete obligated to pay for the gas? A. Yes, because Ann had express authority to buy the gas. B. Yes, because Ann had implied authority to buy the gas. C. Yes, because Ann had apparent authority to buy the gas. D. No.

ANSWER: B. Pete did not directly say anything about buying gas, but refilling the tank was reasonably necessary to carry out Ann's assigned task

Bredeson teaches at UT and also writes textbooks for different publishers. While at UT, he has regular teaching and committee assignments. He reports to a department chair and a Dean, and he is paid a regular salary. While working for UT, he is an _________________ . When writing the books, he is commonly paid a flat rate per project. "We'll pay you X number of dollars to write a 300-page textbook on business ethics by June 1," the publisher might say. The publishers typically do not set specific hours, and he does not typically have the writing managed while it is being done. While writing the books, Bredeson is an __________ . A. employee; employee B. employee; independent contractor C. independent contractor; employee D. independent contractor; independent contractor

ANSWER: B. The teaching work meets all three of the main criteria for employees, and the writing meets all three for contract workers.

Carol and Debby bring separate lawsuits under their 14th Amendment right to Equal Protection. Carol challenges a law that she claims makes distinctions based on gender. Debby challenges a law that she says makes distinctions based on the income level of residents of her state. If the government wishes to keep the challenged laws in place, it will have to convince the court the law is necessary to further a(n) ______________ state interest in Carol's lawsuit and a(n) ______________ state interest in Debby's lawsuit. A. rational; rational B. rational; important C. important; rational D. important; important E. compelling; important

ANSWER: C. Most social and economic regulations are subjected to the rational basis test. Laws or government policies that make distinctions based on gender must be justified as furthering important government interests when challenged in court on 14th Amendment grounds.

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 sues 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? A. Max B. Jack C. Both A and B D. None of the above

ANSWER: C. Max's case is based on the federal Constitution, so it's in. And although Jack's lawsuit is based on both 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.

EX - Zena signs an arbitration agreement on her first day at a new job in which she agrees that if she has any disputes with the company in the future, she will not sue and will only pursue a remedy in arbitration. A year later, Zena has a car accident with Barry. Afterwards, they sign an agreement that they will arbitrate the dispute. Now, Zena is upset at both her employer and at Barry, and she would like to "have her day in court" with both of them. That is to say, she wants to sue both, and not go through arbitration. Can she do so? A. She can sue her company only B. She can sue Barry only C. She can sue both her company and Barry D. No, she must arbitrate both disputes.

ANSWER: D. Whether signed before or after an event that leads to a dispute, arbitration is generally binding.

Ron loses his discrimination claim in federal district court. If he wishes, he can appeal his case to a ________________ court. If he loses there, he can seek to have his case reviewed by ________________ . A. a general trial court; his state's supreme court B. a general trial court; the U.S. Supreme Court C. A U.S. Court of Appeals; his state's supreme court D. A U.S. Court of Appeals; the U.S. Supreme Court

ANSWER: D. Appeals from a federal 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

The idea of a social contract supports the view that corporations are agents of _______________ . The concept of group dynamics as it applies in corporate settings supports the view that corporations are agents of ______________ . A. capital; capital B. capital; society C. society; capital D. society; society

ANSWER: D. Both ideas support an anti-Friedman view that corporations are moral agents and do owe an obligation to help meet societal needs.

Which of the following tend to increase the chances that employees will act ethically? A. Hiring ethical people B. Treating employees well C. Adopting a code of ethics D. Conducting effective ethics training E. All of the above

ANSWER: E. All four tend to make it more likely that employees will behave ethically.

3. High level state courts: Appellate Courts

All states have one or more appellate courts, which hear appeals from judgments entered by the lower courts. - In some states there is only one such court, usually but not always called the supreme court, but in the more populous states a layer of one or more intermediate appellate courts is interposed between the trial courts and the supreme court. Appellate courts decide legal questions; they do not hear testimony of witnesses or otherwise entertain new evidence.

Let's add some facts to the hypothetical we have used before. Walter makes watches. One summer, he invents a new configuration of gears that allows for a watch to keep track of multiple time zones in an entirely new way. He works alone for countless hours, and does not share his work with anyone. The new configuration was very difficult to dream up, and required a significant amount of expertise and imagination. He calls the new watch the "Neptune", and plans to start selling it in his shop. It starts selling very well very quickly. Is Walter's design the kind of thing that can be protected as a trade secret? A. Yes B. No

Answer: A. The watch design checks all 4 boxes from the items listed above the example.

Let's revisit the last sample question, reprinted here for your convenience. Imagine that Peter, who works for Pepsi, puts 200 cans of Pepsi into an empty vending machine on Monday morning. Later that day, Karl Klutz buys a Pepsi from the same machine and takes it out onto a second floor balcony. Karl sees Vince Victim down below, waves to him, and fumbles the Pepsi. The can describes a perfect arc and conks Vince on the head, knocking him unconscious. When he comes to, Vince feels like filing a lawsuit. Whose actions are a proximate cause of this injury? A. Peter B. Karl C. A & B D. None of the Above

Answer: B. Only Karl's action is a proximate cause. Peter is sort of involved in all of this, in the sense that, if he had not restocked the empty machine, this accident might not have happened. - But he would not be considered a proximate cause, because a jury would not say, "Ah, you should have known better - you should have foreseen that this kind of thing would happen if you did your job and put cans in the machine." - Karl's actions would be a proximate cause, because a jury would say that he should have foreseen that if he dropped the can from a high place he might injure someone, and that he should have been more careful to hold onto it.

Imagine that Peter, who works for Pepsi, puts 200 cans of Pepsi into an empty vending machine on Monday morning. Later that day, Karl Klutz buys a Pepsi from the same machine and takes it out onto a second floor balcony. Karl sees Vince Victim down below, waves to him, and fumbles the Pepsi. The can describes a perfect arc and conks Vince on the head, knocking him unconscious. When he comes to, Vince feels like filing a lawsuit. Whose actions are causes in fact of this injury? A. Peter B. Karl C. Both A and B D. None of the above

Answer: B. Both Peter's and Karl's actions are causes in fact. If you eliminate either's actions, the accident doesn't happen. But as we will see shortly, it is very unlikely that Peter will be held responsible for Vince's injuries.

how does the appeals process work

Appeals from judgments of the U.S. courts of appeal, like appeals from judgments of the state supreme courts that present federal questions, can be taken to the U.S. Supreme Court. In most cases, however, these appeals are not a matter of right. Rather, the parties who seek review must petition the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, and the Court has absolute discretion in deciding which of these cases are sufficiently important to warrant the granting of certiorari. A writ of certiorari is an order of a higher court requiring a lower court to send to it the documentary record of the trial.

Ft case 40 - Trade Secrets INTEGRATED CASH MANAGEMENT SERVICES v. DIGITAL TRANSACTIONS, INC.

Both Newlin and Vafa signed nondisclosure agreements with ICM The central question presented by this appeal is whether trade secret protection extends to the manner in which several non-secret utility programs are arranged to create a computer software product. Defendants are thereby prevented from simply shelving the misappropriated information for six months, and then distributing the ICM product as their own. - Trade secrets - Newlin and Vafa with DTI were sued for misappropriating a trade secret from their previous employment with ICM - They both sign nondisclosure agreements with ICM - The database manager program developed by Newlin and Vafa for DTI was similar to the one produced by ICM - No copyright infringement because the code was neither identical nor substantially similar in its expressive elements - The ICM product's architecture could not be readily duplicated without the secret information acquired by ICM through years of research. The architecture of the ICM system was not "readily ascertainable," other than by the improper disclosure and use by Newlin and Vafa

Rex wrecks his car in a collision with Collison. Much later, in a negligence lawsuit, the jury determines that the accident was 67% Rex's fault and 33% Collison's fault. Rex will be able to recover some damages if he lives in a state that follows... A. contributory negligence B. "modified" comparative negligence C. "pure" comparative negligence D. none of the above

C. "pure" comparative negligence

In order to maintain a descriptive trademark, the entity with the trademark must prove that the term suggests some particular characteristic of the goods or services to which it applies and requires the consumer to exercise the imagination in order to draw a conclusion as to the nature of the goods and services.

False. (A descriptive term merely identifies a characteristic or quality of a product or service, such as its color, odor, function, dimensions, or ingredients. A suggestive term suggests some particular characteristic of the goods or services to which it applies and requires the consumer to exercise the imagination in order to draw a conclusion as to the nature of the goods and services.)

There are courts of general jurisdiction in the Federal court system.

False. (All federal courts are of limited jurisdiction; only some states have courts of general jurisdiction.)

T/F Johnny, a citizen of Texas, and Teddy, a citizen of Kentucky, sue Ash, a citizen of Texas, and Aaron, a citizen of Georgia for $125,000 from a claim arising from state law. This suit can be brought in Federal Court.

False. (Because Johnny and Ash are both from Texas, the requirements for diversity jurisdiction are not met. Diversity Jurisdiction requires the claim be worth at least $75,000 and that no defendant have the same state of residency as any of the plaintiffs.)

Taylor, a citizen of Nebraska, sues Devin, a citizen of Michigan, for $100,000 in Nebraska state court for a state tort claim. Devin can't remove the case to a federal court because the case was originally brought in state court.

False. (Cases which meet the requirements for diversity jurisdiction or federal question can be removed from a state court to a federal question.)

Friedman believes that corporate managers shouldn't be allowed to devote their own time and money to whatever projects they deem fit.

False. (Friedman believes that managers should be allowed to do so, but that using corporate resources for such projects they are breaching their duty of loyalty to the shareholders.)

Agents are always liable to third parties if their principals are insane.

False. (If the principal has not yet been declared insane, agents may not be held personally liable to the third party in many instances.)

In order to have a copyright, material must be registered with the U.S. Copyright Office.

False. (It is not required. And, since 1989, there is no longer any requirement that a copyright notice be placed on a work. Still, it's a good idea to register.)

Plaintiffs are able to recover punitive damages from negligence claims

False. (Punitive damages are generally reserved for intentional torts because they are seen as a punishment instead of simply compensation.)

Money is never treated as a good for the purposes of the UCC.

False. (Rare coins and all money treated like a commodity are considered goods, although money used as a medium of exchange is not.)

All cases in Federal courts first appear before a Federal District Court.

False. (Some cases, such as bankruptcy cases, first appear before a specialty court.)

CFOs are more likely to cook the books in order to benefit themselves financially than to do so in order to benefit another.

False. (Studies show that CFOs are more likely to cook the books to benefit their CEOs financially than to benefit themselves. This may illustrate the tendency people have to be obedient to authority.)

An oral contract for more than $500 can be enforced under the UCC only if the defendant admits in his pleading or testimony that a contract was made.

False. (That is just one of the three major exceptions to § 2-201 of the UCC.)

All cases before a federal Circuit court have the right to be heard on appeal.

False. (The Supreme Court gets to choose which cases it hears. Generally, only cases granted writ of certiorari are heard by the Supreme Court.)

All contracts for a sale of goods exceeding $500 must be in writing in order to be enforceable.

False. (This is the general rule, but there are numerous exceptions. Under § 2-201, a verbal contract exceeding $500 can be binding if (1) the seller has already substantially begun producing specially made goods; (2) payment has been made and accepted or goods have been received and accepted; (3) between merchants there has been a confirmatory memorandum sent and the receiving party did not object in writing within 10 days; or (4) the party against whom the contract is to be enforced admitted in court proceedings that an oral agreement existed.)

The Social Contract theory of business argues that a corporation is not mandated to contribute positively to society outside of its economic effects.

False. (This theory argues that the corporation has a contract-like obligation to contribute positively to society because society allows for the creation of the corporation.)

Trademark infringement can happen only if a defendant intentionally copies another's trademark.

False. (Trademark infringement can occur even if the defendant did not intend it, or even if the defendant didn't know about the plaintiff's mark.)

A UCC contract must have all details, such as delivery date and the exact price, included in order to be considered complete.

False. (Under §§ 2-204, 2-305, 2-309, and 2-310 of the UCC, certain details can be taken care of by gap-fillers. This includes delivery date and exact pricing.)

Diversity of Citizenship cases

Parties are not from the same state, and the amount in controversy is greater than $75,000 - it is possible for corporations to be a "citizen" of 2 dif states - all plaintiffs must be from dif states than defendants

Ft Case 25- Offers LEONARD v. PEPSICO, INC.

Plaintiff's understanding of the commercial as an offer must be rejected because the court finds that no objective person could reasonably have concluded that the commercial actually offered consumers a Harrier Jet reasonable objective person would see commercial as puffery would be ridiculous for a civilian to use a $23 mil fighter jet for regular transportation

If a defendant fails to respond to a complaint within a certain amount of time (generally 20 days), a default judgment can be granted against the defendant and the plaintiff wins by default.

True. (If the defendant does not reply in a timely matter, the plaintiff automatically wins by means of a default judgment against the defendant.)

Fraud may be committed by a failure to disclose information.

True. (If the defendant has a duty to disclose certain information, the elements of fraud may be met even if the defendant did not lie. Fraud can include false statements or failure to disclose where a duty to disclose exists.)

Module 49: Featured Case - Agency Law MCGILLIS v. DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

The case featured here presents a common approach that many courts take when deciding whether control is being exerted over workers such that they cannot be termed independent contractors. None of the factors is individually determinative; each is simply one factor to be weighed along with all the others. Although the following case involves employee benefits and does not involve an employer's tort liability, the approach used by the court to determine whether the hired party was an employee or an independent contractor is the same in both contexts. - uber provides no direct supervision - they do not prohibit them from working for their competition - drivers supply own vehicles - when they work is up to drivers discretion We agree with the Department's conclusion that Uber drivers like McGillis are not employees for purposes of reemployment assistance. -- "the central issue is the act of being available to accept requests" and "[t]his control is entirely in the driver's hands." Uber and McGillis contractually agreed that McGillis' work did not make him an employee. This level of free agency is incompatible with the control to which a traditional employee is subject. Affirmed.

Simply seeing another individual make an ethical decision in a similar situation increases the chance that others will act ethically in that same situation.

True. (In experiments, if even one out of several individuals acted ethically, other individuals become much less likely to act immorally.)

Ft Case 38 - Trademarks UT v. KST ELECTRIC LTD.

Trademark infringement case trademark dilution, and unfair competition under federal law, as well as for several state statutory and common-law claims. [Only the federal claims are discussed below.] UT alleges that several logos developed and used by KST infringe on UT's registered trademark that depicts its mascot longhorn in silhouette The central problem for UT is that its circumstantial evidence is largely evidence of niche market fame. One of the major purposes of the TDRA was to restrict dilution causes of action to those few truly famous marks like Budweiser beer, Barbie Dolls, and the like. UT has not created a genuine issue of material fact that the longhorn silhouette logo is "a household name. UT's evidence fails to demonstrate the extremely high level of recognition necessary to show "fame" under the TDRA, summary judgment is appropriate on this claim. UT's dilution claim is dismissed, but its trademark infringement and unfair competition claims will go to trial.

The primary difference between assault and battery is that assaults only involve apprehension while batteries are intrusions of the body.

True. (Although modern courts and statutes frequently use the two terms interchangeably, technically a battery is a rude, inordinate contract with the person of another. An assault, basically, is any act that creates an apprehension of an imminent battery.)

An incidental beneficiary has no rights under a contract and cannot enforce it.

True. (An incidental beneficiary is a person whom the contracting parties did not intent to benefit by making the contract. Because of this, an incidental beneficiary has no rights under a contract and cannot enforce it.)

Common Law is unique because it is able to adapt.

True. (Common Law can be changed from case to case.)

Some contracts made by very young minors are presumed to be void.

True. (Contracts made by children in their "tender years" are presumed void. This is in contrast to older minors entering contracts, which are deemed voidable (by the minor) rather than void.)

Milton Friedman's view is that corporations are agents of capital and that they have only a duty to earn as much money as possible for the shareholders, within the limits of the law and customary ethical practices.

True. (Friedman believes that companies should not engage in correcting problems the company did not cause and that it is not appropriate for the company's managers to do so.)

Even if an agreement is in writing, if it lacks consideration, neither party can enforce it.

True. (Generally, if an agreement lacks consideration, neither party can enforce it, even if it is in writing. Consideration is an essential element of an enforceable contract)

ACC, a Florida company, sells Zach, a Louisiana citizen, a car in Minnesota. The car breaks down while Zach is driving in Oklahoma. Florida has continuous and systematic contacts with Oklahoma because it manufactures products in Oklahoma. Oklahoma has general jurisdiction over ACC and, therefore, has personal jurisdiction over ACC.

True. (If a defendant has continuous and systematic contacts with a jurisdiction, it has general jurisdiction over the defendant. When a state has general jurisdiction over a party, it has personal jurisdiction over the party.)

Courts may rewrite covenants not to compete if they are found to be unreasonable.

True. (Most states have a "blue pencil" rule which allows courts that find a contract's restrictions on competition to be unreasonably broad to rewrite the covenant so that the restrictions are reasonable and then to enforce it as redrawn.)

The UCC's version of the statute of frauds requires that most contracts for at least $500 be in writing.

True. (The UCC's statute of frauds, § 2-201, states that a contract for the sale of goods for a price of $500 or more must be in writing to be enforceable, although there are several exceptions.)

Employees must request leave in order for the FMLA's requirement to come into effect.

True. (The employer need not suggest the possibility of FMLA leave to an employee.)

Ft Case 22 - Free Speech SORRELL v. IMS HEALTH INC.

Vermont's Prescription Confidentiality Law (Act 80) found that the goals of drug marketers are often in conflict with the goals of the state, - that detailing often causes doctors to make decisions based on incomplete and biased information, and that excessive reliance on name brand drugs drives up health care costs. Data miners and drug manufacturers sued Vermont argues that its prohibitions safeguard medical privacy and diminish the likelihood that marketing will lead to prescription decisions not in the best interests of patients or the State. But the "fear that people would make bad decisions if given truthful information" cannot justify content-based burdens on speech. Vermont may be displeased that detailers who use prescriber-identifying information are effective in promoting brand-name drugs. The State can express that view through its own speech. The State may not burden the speech of others in order to tilt public debate in a preferred direction. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.

Ft. Case - Personal Jurisdiction BRISTOL-MYERS SQUIBB CO. v. SUPERIOR COURT

We held that the Nevada courts lacked specific jurisdiction even though the plaintiffs were Nevada residents and "suffered foreseeable harm in Nevada." Because the "relevant conduct occurred entirely in Georgia . . . the mere fact that [this] conduct affected plaintiffs with connections to the forum State did not suffice to authorize jurisdiction." Our straightforward application in this case of settled principles of personal jurisdiction will not result in the parade of horrible's that respondents conjure up. Our decision does not prevent the California and out-of-state plaintiffs from joining together in a consolidated action in the States that have general jurisdiction over BMS.

In 1890, Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act. In 2008, Congress passed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. Which of these is/are a statute? A. The Sherman Antitrust Act B. The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act C. Both A and B D. None of the above

[ANSWER: C. Written laws passed by legislative bodies like Congress are statutes.]

long arm statute

a court can exercise personal jurisdiction over certain out-of-state defendants based on activities and contact that took place within the state - ultimate question is whether the nonresident defendant had "substantial contact" with the forum state.

Samsung believes that Apple has infringed upon its patents. Prior to filing a lawsuit for patent infringement, Samsung and Apple can engage in (1)__________ in order to save time and business relations. If this method does not work, or the two companies decide not to do this, Samsung will have to file a (2)__________ with the court in order to begin their lawsuit. The two parties decide to not petition for a jury trial. After the trial, the judge will consider (3)___________ and ___________ when deciding how to rule on the case. Which answer can correctly fill in the blanks? a. (1) Alternative Dispute Resolution. (2) Complaint. (3) Common law precedent and statutory rules b. (1) Mediation. (2) An answer. (3) Common law and statutory interpretation c. (1) Summary Jury Trial. (2) Complaint. (3) the UCC and precedent d. (1) Alternative Dispute Resolution. (2) Reply. (3) Common law and statutory rules.

a. ((1) Multiple forms of ADR can be attempted prior to filing a lawsuit, including mediation and arbitration. Summary Jury Trial can only occur following a lawsuit being filed. (2) The first thing filed in order to begin a lawsuit is a Complaint. A reply is the defendant's response to an answer (usually the second document filed, unless there is a motion filed by the defense) and an answer is the plaintiff's response to the reply. (3) When deciding the outcome of a case, a judge most almost always consider common law precedent and statutory law surrounding the case. The UCC is the uniform commercial code, generally applicable to contracts between two sophisticated individuals or companies.)

Whom among of the following would be protected under the ADA? a. A person with HIV. b. Homosexuals. c. Exhibitionists. d. Kleptomaniacs.

a. (An HIV infection is a disability under the definition of the ADA. Homosexuality, exhibitionism, and kleptomania are expressly not protected under the ADA.)

Which of the following is not a patentable subject matter? a. Compositions of matter. b. Machines. c. Abstract ideas. d. Processes.

c. (Abstract ideas are not patentable. Machines, manufactures, compositions of matter, processes, and improvements on any type of patentable invention are all considered patentable.)

An exculpatory clause seeking to relieve a parking lot owner from liability for negligence typically will only be effective if what is true? a. The owner does not have anyone watching the lot and does not take the keys of the vehicle. b. The owner charges for use of the lot. c. The clause is very conspicuous and clearly states that the bailee will not be liable. d. All of the above.

c. (In order for the clause to be effective, it must very conspicuous and clearly state that the bailee will not be liable. Under A, the owner would not be liable anyway, so the clause has no effect. B is false.)

John, a construction worker, is helping build a skyscraper for Megacorp, his employer. While working, John carelessly fails to properly fasten a large beam that eventually falls over, very nearly missing Paul, the owner of BigCorp, as he walks through the construction site. Following this, Paul finds out that it was John's fault that he nearly was killed, so he approaches him and begins yelling at him. At this point, John threatens Paul, saying that if Paul tells John's supervisor anything, he'll regret it. However, Paul approaches the supervisor, Anthony, anyway. Anthony says that if Paul brings charges, he will spread rumors about Paul. What would be John's best defense against Paul's claim of assault for the verbal threats? a. Because it was a warning of an intentional tort, it cannot support a claim of assault. b. Because it was not accompanied with action, it cannot support a claim of assault. c. Because it was a threat of a future action, it cannot support a claim of assault. d. None of the above.

c. (In order to support a claim of assault, the threat has to be one which creates an apprehension of imminent bodily contact of an offensive nature. A would establish a claim of assault if it was of imminent action. B fails because assault does not need action in order to be established.)

Jim wishes to expand his net worth by being more aggressive in the stock market. To this end, he contacts Walt, a well-known stock broker, and sets up an account with a salary in order to have Walt make stock trades for him. Which of the following actions would be considered a breach of fiduciary duty by Walt? a. Walt also controls the stocks of one of Jim's largest competitors, Bob. b. Due to rapidly changing market conditions, Walt is unsure of the exact value of all of Jim's stocks. c. Walt invested Jim's money, and made a large portion of money, in Sony. However, Jim expressly told Walt not to invest in Sony. d. Walt lost a large portion of Jim's money while doing stock trades that he normally would.

c. (This would be a breach of the duty of obedience. When an agent is given clear instructions of the principal, which are legal, the agent must follow them. A would not necessarily be a breach of loyalty because Walt can be loyal to both consumers. B is not a failure to account because Walt may still know the amount of each stock he has. D is not a failure to use reasonable care because Walt has not been negligent (assuming Walt is not generally negligent in his transactions).)

If WalCo was suing Bob for misappropriation of a trade secret, which of the following would be the most important to establish? a. WalCo maintained reasonable measure to protect security. b. The information was actually a trade secret. c. Bob did not simply reverse engineer the product. d. All of the above.

d. (If Bob proves any of the answers to be false, he would win the case because WalCo would have failed to establish a cause of action for trade secret misappropriation.)

What was the original ruling in BMS v. Superior Court? What was the Supreme Court's action?

in favor of Superior Court saying that they could exercise specific personal jurisdiction, Supreme Court reversed

Roger has created an energy drink that he hopes will become popular, and he wants to protect his intellectual property. Specifically, he wants to protect the drink's "secret formula", or recipe, and he also wants to protect his logo, which is a cartoonish drawing of a stick man with steam blowing out of his ears. Which of these things will Roger probably be able to trademark? A. The secret formula only B. The logo only C. Both A and B D. None of the above

the logo only