U.S. Law and Legal Analysis

In every state, the highest appellate court is called the supreme court.

False

In trial courts, there is always a jury to determine the facts.

False

Stare decisis does not apply when it comes to determining the meaning of a statute.

False

States can never criminalize symbolic speech, such as cross burning

False

The goal is to have one rule that is more than a page long that tells us where to go find the actual rule.

False

The privilege against self-incrimination and the right to assistance of counsel apply to trials, but not to the interrogation stage of criminal investigation

False

To be binding, an appellate decision must be unanimous.

False

Always incorporate the law if one applies.

True

Arrange the rule in order of seniority of the courts, so you know what is mandatory and what is persuasive depending on your case.

True

Criminal law defines for society what behaviors are illegal and determines how lawbreakers should be punished.

True

Criminal law in most jurisdictions is defined by statutory law.

True

If a defendant is considered incompetent at the time of trial, he may not be tried, even if he was sane at the time he committed the crime

True

If the decisions vary greatly, one should look at the individual facts and try to find a pattern or a list of exceptions.

True

In general, a synthesized rule should help you predict the outcome of a case.

True

Jurisdiction refers to the ability of a specific court to hear a particular type of case.

True

The law provides a mechanism for resolving conflicts without resorting to personal violence,

True

The two required elements for every crime are the requisite mens rea and actus reas

True

Trial courts must determine both questions of fact and questions of law.

True

Define the maxim ejusdem generis

"Of the same kind" when a general word in a statute follows a list of specific examples, courts should construe the general term to include only things of the same type as those specified in the list

Define the maxim in pari materia.

"on like subject matter" requires courts to construe sections or parts of statutes harmoniously with each other, as well as sections or parts in other statutes on the same subject or with the same purpose. it ensures harmony among statutes

How do courts determine what law binds them>

A court determines law binds them based in geography and subject matter. In other words, courts are bound by primary binding authority in line of appeal.

Explain three ways courts make law.

1. Adopting or creating a new legal doctrine 2. Deciding cases that interpret existing legal doctrine 3. Interpreting ambiguous or vague language in enacted law

A legislator has proposed a bill that prohibits physician-assisted suicide. what stages must this bill go through before it can be passed into law?

1. Legislator introduces a bill in her chamber 2. The bill is referred to a committee 3. A committee reviews the bill 4. Experts are interested parties testify on the impact of the legislation 5. A committee issues a report including a revised version of the bill, and also recommends whether the full chamber should endorse the bill 6. A full chamber considers, debates, and votes on the committee's version of the bill 7. If the bill passes, it goes through the same process in the opposite chamber 8. If both chambers pass identical bills, the bill is sent to the President to be signed 8. If the President signs the bill within ten days it becomes law 9. If the President vetoes the bill, the bill goes back to the Legislature 10. A veto may be overridden by a two-thirds vote in each chamber

Name one type of legal test. Explain the test you have identified.

1. Totality of the Circumstances 2. Balancing test 3. Factor test 4. Element test

What are 3 sources of legislative intent?

1. canons (maxims) 2. legislative history 3. cases construing statute

What are the 5 component steps of a typical rule-based reasoning?

1. the point of the analysis 2. the stated premise or rule 3. the explanation of the rule (if necessary) 4. the application of the rule to the facts 5. the conclusion

Name one source of legislative history that is helpful in determining legislative intent.

A committee report

When is a court bound to follow a prior case?

A court is bound to follow a prior case if it was decided by a higher court in the same jurisdiction, or line of appeal, and the prior case raised the same legal issue and had the same or similar facts to the case-at-bar

A requirement that no more than a certain percentage of a known pollutant be released by factory smoke stacks.

Administrative Regulation

A rule that all semi-trailers traveling on interstate highways use concave mud flaps

Administrative Regulation

What is the difference between an ambiguous term in a statute and a vague term in a statute?

An ambiguous term is a term that could have more than one meaning. A vague terms is a term that has no deifned limits

How can both a Plaintiff and a Defendant use the same precedent to support their arguments?

Analogizing and distinguishing 1. a plaintiff and a defendant can both use the same precedent. a plaintiff or defendant can employ an analogy and argue that the precedent and case-at-bar are legally similar, this stare decisis applies. 2. a plaintiff or a defendant can also draw a distinction and argue that the precedent and the case-at-bar are factually dissimilar, and thus stare decisis would not apply

Why is it important to compare a precedent to your client's case?

Because courts follow stare decisis. stare decisis requires courts to rule similarly in similar cases. When a precedent addresses the same issues as those raised in the case-at-bar and the critical facts or some characteristic of the critical facts are also similar, then a court should rule the same way in the case-at-bar as the court ruled in the precedent. Attorneys compare the precedent to cases-at-bar to persuade a court to rule in their favor.

What are some similarities and differences between IRAC and CREAC?

Both provide a structure to present a legal argument. Each serves as a guide or template when drafting legal analyses. In each of the paradigms, each letter represents a specific component or building block of legal analysis. Each paradigm functions similarly and aims to present the analysis of a legal issue logically, concisely, and precisely. (Legal Analysis, p. 100) IRAC - issue, rule, application, conclusion CREAC - conclusion, rule, explanation of law, application of law, conclusion

When is it appropriate to use broad analogies?

Broad analogies are appropriate when the critical facts of the precedents do not lend themselves to a direct comparison. Instead, some characteristic of the critical fact may be used to form the basis of the analogy or the distinction

In a case brief, which of the following would be the best statement of a rule?

Burglary occurs when there is a breaking and entering of a dwelling at nighttime

A law prohibiting government from interfering with an individual's right to freedom of speech.

Constitution

A rule making a bar owner liable for any injuries caused by a patron to whom the bar sold drinks.

Court Opinion

You are arguing a state issue before a New Mexico trial court. What of the following cases are binding on that court? A. Decisions from the court of last resort in New Mexico B. Decisions from the court of last resort in Texas C. Decisions from the federal circuit court of appeals in New Mexico

Decisions from the court of last resort in New Mexico

What are the two sources if law in the American system?

Enacted law and Case law

Define critical facts.

Facts from the controlling precedent that the deciding court found dispositive when it resolved a legal dispute

A rule synthesized on cases in Arizona will equally apply to a case in New York.

False

A table or chart is never useful in building a synthesized rule.

False

Because dissenting opinions represent the viewpoint of those who lost the case, noting their reasoning in a case brief is never necessary.

False

Because so much is at stake in a criminal trial, juries are not allowed to draw inferences about the defendant's state of mind, but must rely on direct evidence only

False

Charging a person with a criminal violation and suing that person civilly constitutes double jeopardy.

False

Civil law is almost entirely statutory while criminal law is rooted in the common law.

False

Courts will only use the plain meaning of the statutory language when interpreting a statute

False

Create three rules from all cases on point to integrate every possible fact and conclusion on each case.

False

Due process requires that there be uniformity between the states as to what constitutes criminal behavior?

False

If a plaintiff brings a suit in federal court, federal law will always be applied to the underlying controversy.

False

If you are unable to write a rule, because the case law is so very different between cases and judges, then do not synthesize a rule. It's too hard.

False

In a civil case, a plaintiff can recover either monetary damages or an injunction, but not both.

False

There are three main types of property: real property, personal property, and business property

False - real property and personal property

A legislator has proposed a bill that prohibits physician-assisted suicide. If enacted into law, a court can amend the language of the statute.

False, a court cannot amend the language of a statute

A statute regulates the sale of oranges, lemons, limes, and other fruits. Employing ejusdem generis, could a court conclude that apples are NOT regulated under the statute?

No, because the court would conclude that apples are "other fruits"

How do lawyers identify critical facts in a case?

Lawyers examine the reasoning of the controlling cases and review what facts the court relied on to reach its holding

What are the three levels of courts that exist in the hierarchy of the federal court system?

Level 1: U.S. District Court (trial court) Level 2: Court of Appeals (intermediate appellate court) Level 3: U.S. Supreme Court

What are the three levels of courts that exist in the hierarchy of most state court systems?

Level 1: trial court Level 2: intermediate court of appeals Level 3: state supreme court

When is it appropriate to use narrow analogies?

Narrow analogies are appropriate when the critical facts of the precedents are readily comparable to the key facts in the case-at-bar or when the critical facts alone can form the basis of a fact comparison, instead of some characteristic of facts

Can a court amend or change language in a statute? why or why not?

No, courts cannot amend or change language in a statute because that is the power of the legislature. Some courts can declare the statute unconstitutional but the court cannot change the statute to "make it" constitutional. The legislature would need to pass a new statute to address the constitutional issue if possible.

Is the following rule valid> Rule: Rodriguez likes fine dining. Case 1: Rodrigues ate at McDonald's on Monday. Case 2: Rodriguez ate at Wendy's on Tuesday. Case 3: Rodriguez ate at Chick-fil-A on Thursday. Case 4: Rodriguez ate at Ruth's Chris Steak House on Saturday.

No, the rule is probably not valid

How is ruled-based reasoning different from analogical reasoning?

Ruled based reasoning structures an argument around an explicit rule. Rule based reasoning requires a lawyer to apply a set of facts to a stated legal premise, like a statute or common-law rule. The application of facts to the applicable rule allows a lawyer to deduce a conclusion. Analogical reasoning structures an argument around comparing facts. Analogical reasoning focuses on facts and requires a lawyer to induce a conclusion by establishing a legal analogy between case law and a client's facts.

How does a rule frame legal analysis?

Rules frame legal analysis because a practitioner will apply the rule(s) of law to a "new" set of facts presented by a client to predict how a court or tribunal would likely rule in the matter. Depending on the rule, a legal practitioner may need to provide case explanations (analogies) to illustrate or prove the rule

When the perpetrator of a crime is punished so that he or she will not commit other crimes, this is known as

Specific deterrence

Discuss the purpose behind stare decisi.

Stare decisis is the controlling doctrine governing judges' ability to "make" law. courts must follow precedent, stare decisis promotes stability, reliability, predictability, consistency, and fairness in the application of the law.

A requirement that all motorcycle riders wear helmets.

Statute

How is statutory analysis different from case-law analysis?

Statutory analysis begins with a rule, the statute itself. It also may examine other sources, such as case law, that interpret the meaning and application of a statute. In contrast, case-law analysis first requires practitioners to identify a rule. This may require practitioners to synthesize cases to identify the rule.

Which of the following raises a question of law? A. the defendant was speeding. B. The defendant drank three beers before leaving the bar. C. The defendant was intoxicated.

The defendant was speeding and the defendant was intoxicated

Why must a plaintiff or lawyer consider a court's jurisdiction?

The litigant needs to know if a particular court can hear the case, and also what law is binding.

A single event can become the basis of an action in both the criminal and civil courts

True

A synthesized rule should incorporate all available authority with a clear list of exceptions of definitions of the terms in question.

True

Which of the following raises a question of law? A. Whether police officers sold an illegal drug to the defendant. B. Whether the substance the defendant sold was an illegal drug. C. Whether the defendant had been convicted of selling illegal drugs in the past. D. whether the police officers actions constituted entrapment.

Whether the police officers actions constituted entrapment.

When may it be unnecessary to explain the rule as one of the steps of a rule-based reasoning?

You don't have to explain the rule if it is clear, controlling, and unequivocal

A cause of action can be defined as

a claim that based upon the law and the client's facts supports a lawsuit

The U. S. Supreme Court A. hears all appeals as a group B. reaches decisions by a majority vote C. consists of a Chief Justice and eight associate justices

all choices

What is the difference between an element and a factor?

an element must be proven; a factor is something that is considered, but not required

Janet was angry with Betty. One night after leaving class, she deliberately drove her car into the side of Betty's car. This is an example of

an intentional tort.

Law can be categorized as

state, federal, or local; civil or criminal; substantive or procedural

Because courts write opinions to convince you that their decision is correct, it is often hard to write the criticism section of a case brief.

true

What is NOT a source of legislative history that is helpful in determining legislative intent?

case law

Define the plain meaning doctrine.

courts presume that legislators use ordinary and everyday language when they draft las. Under this doctrine, courts must give unambiguous language its obvious or ordinary meaning. Plain meaning is the meaning of a word or phrase that is gernally accepted by reasonable persons. When a statute is unambiguous, courts construe the language according to its plain meaning. If a court were to strictly interpret a statute according to its plain meaning, but the interpretation would have an illogical result or frustrates the legislature's intent, then a court may disregard the statute's plain meaning.

When a minor change in the facts could change the outcome of a case, it is said to be

fact bound

An ambiguous term in a statute

has more than one meaning

The first step in legal analysis is to

identify and review the relevant facts

In the facts section of a case brief, you should

include only the facts that helped form the basis of the court's decision

How do legal professionals identify rules in cases?

legal professionals identify the principles of law-expressed or implied -employed or adopted by the court to resolve the issue

A state constitution declares that superior court judges are to be elected by both branches of the legislature. The legislature enacts a statute allowing the governor to appoint a superior court judge to fill a vacancy. Is the statute constitutional?

no

Statute A regulates the sale of all fruits. Statute B includes tomatoes in a provision that regulates vegetables. Reading the statute in para materia, would a court include tomatoes in Statute A?

no

When only the federal government can legislate in a given area, this is known as

preemption

All of the elements of robbery are contained in the armed robbery statute. Therefore,

robbery is called a lesser included offense of armed robbery

When it comes to statutory analysis, the very first legal source to review is the

statute

Identify which of the following sources of law are primary sources of law. A. Statute B. Case C. Legal newspaper article D. Legal encyclopedia article

statute and case

One day, during an argument, Kira told Janet that she thought Janet was rude. Janet sued Kira for slander. The judge dismissed the case, saying that Janet did not have a valid cause of action. This means

that saying someone is rude does not form a legal basis for slander and that Janet did not please sufficient facts to prove a case of slander

The federal court system consists of

the U.S. Supreme Court, circuit courts of appeals, and district courts

Define legislative history.

the body of documents and transcripts created by a legislature as a bill works its way through the various stages of the enactment process

In order for a person to be convicted of a crime, the state must prove

the defendant had the requisite bad intent and the defendant committed the requisite bad behavior

What is the purpose of the "A" in IRAC and CREAC?

to apply the applicable law to the facts of the case

If you left a classroom with a classmate's textbook, thinking it was your own, you could not be convicted of theft because

were mistaken as to a fact and did not have the requisite mens rea

In a case brief, which of the following would be the best statement of an issue?

whether the defendant committed burglary, a breaking and entering of a dwelling at nighttime, when he entered a warehouse