BLAW 371 Chapter 2

Concurrent jurisdiction is when the:

(D) federal and state court systems both have jurisdiction

In rem jurisdiction would not be likely to include jurisdiction over:

(D) jurisdiction in a child custody dispute of parents living in different states

State courts may never have jurisdiction in which of the following situations?

(D) plaintiff and defendant live in the same state and the dispute involves a law for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction

Forum non conveniens (the forum is not suitable) is a doctrine used by judges to:

(D) transfer cases to another court

Which kind of property could not be subject to in rem jurisdiction?

(E) all of the other choices could be subject to in rem jurisdiction

In Erie v. Tompkins, where Tompkins was hit by a New York train in Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court held that the matter must be tried under federal law because the law of New York and Pennsylvania were in conflict. T/F

False

In the federal and state systems, the only courts with general jurisdiction are the US and state supreme courts. T/F

False

Juries are used in state courts, but not in federal court. T/F

False

Only state court systems, not the federal court system, have courts of original jurisdiction. T/F

False

Small claims courts in all states may not hear cases involving amounts in dispute over $1,000. T/F

False

Some states require that no matter what the dispute, all cases must be tried under the law of that state. No conflict-of-law tests will be applied. T/F

False

State court systems are all, by constitutional law, like the federal system, with trial courts, courts of appeal, and a supreme court. T/F

False

State courts, in contrast to federal courts, are known as court of limited jurisdiction. T/F

False

State long-arm statutes may be used to obtain jurisdiction over any corporation regardless of how much business it does in a state. T/F

False

The Constitution requires each state court system to have appeals courts and a supreme court. T/F

False

The doctrine of forum non conveniens applies only in federal district courts, not state trial courts. T/F

False

The plaintiff notifies the defendant of a legal action against him by a conflict-of law declaration. T/F

False

Traditionally, in contracts cases, the conflict-of-law rule is that the law of the state in which a contract was breached will determine the validity of the contract. T/F

False

Under in rem jurisdiction, a court has power over the property of a defendant regardless of where the property is located. T/F

False

Under in rem jurisdiction, a court has power over the real (physical) property of a defendant but not financial assets of a defendant. T/F

False

A court can exercise jurisdiction over a corporate defendant if the court is located in the state in which the corporation is incorporated. T/F

True

A court's jurisdictional authority is generally limited to the boundaries of the state in which it is located. T/F

True

A decision of a state's highest court may be appealed to the US supreme court. T/F

True

A long-arm statute is a state law that allows state courts to reach beyond the state to obtain jurisdiction over non-residents. T/F

True

A plaintiff who wants to bring a lawsuit must go to a court that has subject matter jurisdiction and jurisdiction over the defendant. T/F

True

Concurrent jurisdiction means both a state court and a federal court may have the power to hear a case. T/F

True

Courts often apply a "significant interest" test in conflicts-of-law cases to determine which court should have jurisdiction over a dispute. T/F

True

Federal courts have limited jurisdiction and are empowered to hear only those cases within the judicial powers of the US. T/F

True

If a dispute may be resolved in federal courts only, the federal court is said to have exclusive jurisdiction. T/F

True

If the parties to a case are from different states, there is more than $75,000 in dispute, and federal law is involved, the case may be heard in either federal or state court. T/F

True

If the parties to a case are from different states, there is more than $75,000 in dispute, and state law is involved, the case may be heard in either federal or state court. T/F

True

In Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers, which involved a dispute between an Idaho resident who ordered jeans from a Maine website-based seller, the Idaho court held that since the Maine seller intended to do business in Idaho, it became subject to Idaho court jurisdiction. T/F

True

In Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers, which involved a dispute between an Idaho resident who ordered jeans from a Maine website-based seller, the Idaho court held that the Maine seller was subject to Idaho court jurisdiction under the state long-arm statute. T/F

True

In Erie v. Tompkins, where Tompkins was hit by a New York train in Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court held that federal common law, as first announced in Swift v. Tyson, was to be abandoned in favor of state common law. T/F

True

In rem jurisdiction means that a court has the power to issue a judgment with respect to property such as a house or bank account. T/F

True

In some matters, such as a dispute between two state governments, the US Supreme Court has original and exclusive jurisdiction. T/F

True

Jurisdiction means the "power to speak of the law" by a court. T/F

True

Like the federal court system, state courts have a system of appellate courts and courts of original jurisdiction. T/F

True

One advantage of small claims courts is that they are less formal than regular courts. T/F

True

State law may limit the right of citizens to bring certain cases to certain courts for resolution. T/F

True

Subject-matter jurisdiction is a constitutional or statutory limitation on the disputes a court can resolve. T/F

True

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are used in many state court systems to set procedure in state courts. T/F

True

The case Erie v. Tompkins, involving a man hit by a train in Pennsylvania, holds that federal courts must apply either state common law or state statutory law in resolving disputes between citizens of different states. T/F

True

The doctrine of forum non conveniens is closely related to the issue of venue. T/F

True

The venue of a case may be changed due to excessive publicity about the matter. T/F

True

Trials courts at both the federal and state level are called courts of original jurisdiction. T/F

True

Venue of a lawsuit concerns the fairness of the location in which a case is tried. T/F

True

Proper venue refers to:

the proper place where a lawsuit is heard

Right of removal allows:

(A) defendants to have a case removed to a federal court if concurrent jurisdiction exists

According to the Supreme Court in Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, where Tompkins sued a New York company that owned a train that hit him in Pennsylvania, the doctrine of Swift v. Tyson, which held that federal courts exercising jurisdiction on the ground of diversity of citizenship need not, in matters of general jurisprudence, apply [the common law] of the state as declared by its highest court, introduced:

(A) discrimination against state citizens by non-state citizens

In rem jurisdiction is most likely to include jurisdiction over:

(A) a bank account

Which of the following could be subject to in rem jurisdiction:

(A) a bank account (B) a house (C) a field (D) shares of stock in a company (E) all of the other choices are correct Answer : (E)

Which of the following would NOT be subject to in rem jurisdiction:

(A) a bank account (B) a house (C) a field (D) shares of stock in a company (E) all of the other choices would be subject to in rem jurisdiction Answer : (E)

Conflict-of-law problems may arise when:

(A) a state court hears a case involving incidents that took place in more than one state or entirely in a different state

In Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, where Tompkins sued a New York company that owned a train that hit him in Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court reversed the decision for Tompkins by the court of appeals because it held that:

(A) applying the doctrine of Swift v. Tyson rendered impossible equal protection of the law

If either state courts or federal courts have the power to hear a dispute this is known as:

(A) concurrent jurisdiction

In Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers an Idaho resident, Blimka, ordered a large quantity of jeans from My Web, a Maine company that advertised its goods on the Internet. When a dispute arose over the quality of the jeans, Blimka sued My Web in Idaho state court. My Web contended the Idaho court did not have jurisdiction. The Idaho high court held that:

(A) due to diversity of citizenship, the case had to be transferred to federal court in Idaho (B) because the Maine company did business electronically, not physically, in Idaho, it was not subject to the jurisdiction of Idaho courts (C) Due Process was violated by forcing a Maine defendant to appear in Idaho court (D) due to diversity of citizenship, the case had to be transferred to federal court in Maine (E) none of the other choices are correct Answer : (E)

In Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, where Tompkins sued a New York company that owned a train that hit him in Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court held that:

(A) federal common law did not exist in diversity-of-citizenship cases

A court's power over the person of the defendant is referred to as:

(A) in rem jurisdiction

In rem jurisdiction can include jurisdiction over:

(A) intangible property (such as a bank account) (B) tangible (real) property (C) shares of stock in a company (D) a house (E) any of the other choices could be correct Answer: E

Federal crimes, bankruptcy, patents and copyrights are all examples of:

(A) matters over which federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction

Because of in rem jurisdiction, if Illinois resident Andy sues Alabama resident Carol over a Illinois property dispute and Carol refuses to respond, the Illinois court may:

(A) not decide who the rightful owner is because it lacks personal jurisdiction over Carol (B) not decided who the rightful owner is because it lacks personal jurisdiction over Alabama (C) not decide who the rightful owner is because it lacks relative jurisdiction over Carol (D) decide who the rightful owner is because Illinois and Alabama have a special agreement (E) none of the other choices are correct

In Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, where Tompkins sued a New York company that owned a train that hit him in Pennsylvania:

(A) the U.S. Supreme Court said that federal common law must be applied in federal court (B) the U.S. Supreme Court said that since this was a matter of common law involving two states, it was a matter for the state courts, not federal district court (C) the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania said this was a matter of New York common law that must be tried in federal court (D) the Supreme Court of New York said this was a matter of Pennsylvania common law that must be tried in that state (E) none of the other choices are correct Answer : (E)

In Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, where Tompkins sued a New York company that owned a train that hit him in Pennsylvania:

(A) the U.S. Supreme Court said that state common law must be applied in federal court

The general conflict-of-law rule for tort cases is that:

(A) the law of the place where the tort occurred applies

When considering a motion to transfer a case for forum non conveniens a court considers:

(A) where the actions related to the case took place (B) where the witnesses and evidence are located (C) whether the parties will be unfairly burdened by using a particular court (D) all of the other specific choices are correct Answer: D

State courts of general jurisdiction:

(B) are usually organized into districts on the county level

An Idaho resident bought a large quantity of jeans over the Internet from a Maine company. When a dispute over the quality of the product arose, the Idaho resident sued the Maine company in Idaho state court. When the Maine company protested, the supreme court of Idaho, in Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers, held that the buyer:

(B) could sue in state court in Idaho

If a dispute may be resolved in a state court only, the state court is said to have:

(B) exclusive jurisdiction

Proper venue has as its basis:

(B) fairness

In Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers an Idaho resident, Blimka, ordered a large quantity of jeans from My Web, a Maine company that advertised its goods on the Internet. When a dispute arose over the quality of the jeans, Blimka sued My Web in Idaho state court. My Web contended the Idaho court did not have jurisdiction. The Idaho high court held that:

(B) the defendants' actions did satisfy minimum contacts with respect to the fraud allegations

When a state court hears a case involving incidents that took place in more than one state or entirely in a different state a ____ problem may arise.

(C) conflict-of-law

Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over cases involving:

(C) copyrights

Because of in rem jurisdiction, if Illinois resident Andy sues Alabama resident Carol over a Illinois property dispute and Carol refuses to respond, the Illinois court may:

(C) decide who the rightful owner is because the property is located in Illinois

In Erie Railroad v. Tompkins, where Tompkins was hit by a New York train while in Pennsylvania, regarding the application of common law in a diversity of citizenship case in federal district court, the Supreme Court decided that:

(C) the common law of the appropriate state must be applied in cases in federal courts

When a party to lawsuit uses the doctrine of forum non conveniens, she asks the court:

(C) to dismiss the case and send it to another court

If there has been a lot of publicity surrounding a case, the defendant may request:

(D) a change of venue

When a dispute brought in a state court involves incidents that occurred in more than one state, what problem may arise?

(D) a conflict-of-law problem

In Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers an Idaho resident, Blimka, ordered a large quantity of jeans from My Web, a Maine company that advertised its goods on the Internet. When a dispute arose over the quality of the jeans, Blimka sued My Web in Idaho state court. My Web contended the Idaho court did not have jurisdiction. The Idaho high court held that:

(D) because the Maine company did business, electronically, in Idaho, it was subject to the jurisdiction of Idaho courts

In rem jurisdiction gives state courts jurisdiction to:

A) resolve disputes over property located in their state

Small claims courts:

All of the above are correct

A long-arm statute is a:

B) State law permits its courts to reach beyond state lines for jurisdiction over non-residents defendants

When a court system has two levels of appellate courts, appeal is usually a matter of right at the first level and ____ at the second level.

C) Discretion of the court

Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over cases involving:

C) Federal Crimes

Small claims courts:

C) Have less formal procedure than regular court

In some rare instances, the U.S. Supreme Court has:

C) Original and exclusive jurisdiction

Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over cases involving:

C) PAtents

Small claims courts are good for collecting small debts because:

C) The procedure is less formal representation by an attorney is not necessary

The federal court system is a(n) ____ system:

D) Three-level

A case involving in rem jurisdiction means a court has authority to control property such as a house, but does not include intangible property, such as stock in a company. T/F

False

A court can exercise jurisdiction over a corporate defendant if the court is located in the state in which the corporation has "visible advertising." T/F

False

A court has jurisdiction over a business defendant if the business has a web site that can be accessed in the state in which suit was filed. T/F

False

At the state level, there is always a right of review up to the Supreme Court Level. T/F

False

By definition, the only court of "original jurisdiction" in the US is the US Supreme Court. T/F

False

Courts of general jurisdiction are appellate courts with authority to hear all appeals from lower, more specialized, courts. T/F

False

Federal courts have jurisdiction over matters such as divorce if the parties to the case now live in separate states. T/F

False

If both parties to a case live in the same state and there is less than $75,000 in dispute, then no matter what the legal issue, the case must be in state court. T/F

False

In Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers, which involved a dispute between an Idaho resident who ordered jeans from a Maine website-based seller, the Idaho court held that due to diversity of citizenship the case would have to be heard in federal court. T/F

False

In Blimka v. My Web Wholesalers, which involved a dispute between an Idaho resident who ordered jeans from a Maine website-based seller, the Idaho court held that since the Maine seller had no physical presence in Idaho it was not subject to Idaho court jurisdiction. T/F

False

In Erie v. Tompkins, where Tompkins was hit by a New York train in Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court held that federal common law, as first announced in Swift v. Tyson, had to be applied to cases where there was diversity of citizenship, forcing the case into federal court. T/F

False

A conflict-of-law arises when incidents occur that have taken place in more than one state or entirely in another state from the one in which the lawsuit was filed. T/F

True

A court can exercise jurisdiction over a corporate defendant if the court is located in the state in which the corporation is doing business. T/F

True