Chapter 05 - Trial and Appellate Courts

memorandum decision (per curiam opinion)

A court's decision that gives the ruling (what it decides and orders done) but no opinion (reasons for the decision). A memorandum opinion is the same as a per curiam opinion, which is an opinion without a named author, usually a brief and unanimous decision.

trial

A judicial examination, in accordance with the law, of a criminal or civil action. It is an "on-the-record hearing," which means the determination is to be made on the basis of what is presented in court. It is a trial of fact with judgment entered on the law.

question of law

A question for the judge; that is, a question as to the appropriate law to be applied, or the correct interpretation of the law.

question (issue) of fact

A question for the jury in a jury trial or for the judge in a bench trial. Fact questions are evidentiary questions concerning who, when, where, and what.

record

All the evidence presented at trial, whether or not recorded.

trier of fact

Also called factfinder; the entity that determines fact in a trial. In a jury trial, the jury is entrusted with factfinding; in a bench trial, the judge necessarily must fi nd the facts as well as make conclusions of law.

compensatory damages

Amount awarded to an injured party to make her whole; that is, in tort, to compensate for all injuries, and in contract, to put the nonbreaching party in the position he would have been in if the contract had been performed.

garnishment

An action by which one who is owed a debt may collect payments through a third party, often an employer.

writ of prohibition

An order by a higher court directing a lower court not to do something.

appellate courts

As distinguished from trial courts, courts that function primarily to correct errors of the lower, trial courts and do not ordinarily serve as factfinders. The two common forms of appellate courts are intermediate appellate courts, usually called courts of appeal(s), and the highest courts, usually called supreme courts.

no-fault divorce

Contemporary method divorce that does away with the need to prove fault (i.e., state grounds) against the other spouse.

jury instructions

Detailed directions (instructions) given by the judge to the jury about its functions in the lawsuit.

Carruthers v. State

Did the assistant district attorney make improper arguments? Reverse death sentence and remand the case for another jury to consider. Pg (140) Carruther murdered a person. During trial, the defense cited biblical quotes that seemed to sway the jury to a death sentence because they are now listening to a "higher power". Holding: Court held that there should be a reversal of the death sentence and remand the case for resentencing.

Minneapolis Star & Tribune Company v. Lee

May a court issue an order forbidding publication of information about juvenile case obtained from involved parties and at the contempt of hearing which was open to public? Te trial court's order was an unconstitutional prior restraint of speech; it is hereby vacated; writ of probation granted pg (146) Issue: May a court issue an order forbidding publication of information about a juvenile case obtained form involved parties and at the contempt hearing which was open to the public. Hearing: The trial courts order was an unconstitutional prior restraint of speech. It is hereby vacated. The writ of prohibition is granted.

prejudicial error (reversible error)

Mistakes made at trial that are sufficiently serious to prejudice the result.

physical evidence

Physical objects introduced as evidence, such as a gun, a lock, drugs, and so on.

remand

Sending a case back to a lower court; done by a higher court.

Alva v. Teen Help

Should this appeal be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction? We conclude that the requirement for timely notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional prerequisite to our review. (pg 137) A timely notice of appeal in a civil case is jurisdictional, not merely compliance with a "claim processing rule" subject to forfeiture for falter to object. A party sought to enforce a rule after the court had reached the merits. Holding: Courts didn't enforce a rule. Thy held that a court may not enforce its own rules unless a party timely invokes them would be nonsensical. Such a holding would place a court at the mercy of the parties.

punitive damages

Sometimes awarded beyond mere compensation (see compensatory damages) to punish a defendant for outrageous conduct in tort.

Irby v. Fairbanks Gold Mining, Inc.

Supreme Court of Alaska. Edward P. IRBY, Deceased, and Cartrie Irby, Edward P. Irby II, and Hannah C. Irby, Beneficiaries, Appellants, v. FAIRBANKS GOLD MINING, INC., and Old Republic Insurance Co., Appellees. No. S-12680. Decided: March 20, 2009 INTRODUCTION This appeal concerns the timeliness of a March 2004 workers' compensation claim. Edward Irby disappeared in an apparent industrial accident on April 13, 1997. Irby's wife promptly petitioned the Fairbanks district court for a presumptive death certificate, but in October 1997 the district court jury determined there was insufficient evidence to presume Irby dead. In 2003 Irby's son filed a second presumptive death petition; the jury in this second proceeding decided in October 2003 that Irby was presumed dead in the industrial accident. Irby's widow filed a workers' compensation claim for herself and her children in March 2004. The Alaska Workers' Compensation Board rejected Irby's employer's contention that the claim was untimely and awarded death benefits. The employer appealed to the superior court, which reversed. It held that the one-year statute of limitations, AS 23.30.105(a), began running on April 13, 2002, when Irby was presumed dead per AS 13.06.035(5), and that the March 2004 claim was therefore untimely. Applying tolling principles and because Irby's family acted reasonably in pursuing a presumptive death certificate before filing a claim for workers' compensation benefits, we hold that the claim was timely and remand for reinstatement of the board's decision and order. CONCLUSION The superior court judgment, which reversed the Decision and Order of the board, is REVERSED. We REMAND with directions to reinstate the September 12, 2005 Final Decision and Order of the board. We AFFIRM the board decision not to impose a penalty on Fairbanks Gold. We AFFIRM Judge Steinkruger's denial of the Irbys' peremptory challenge of Judge Olsen.

Clark County School District v. Virtual Education Software, Inc.

Supreme Court of Nevada. CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, a Nevada Political Subdivision, Appellant, v. VIRTUAL EDUCATION SOFTWARE, INC., a Nevada Corporation, Respondent. No. 50313. Decided: August 6, 2009 In this appeal, we consider two issues of first impression in a business defamation action. First, we consider whether the absolute privilege applies to defamatory communications made by a nonlawyer in anticipation of a judicial proceeding. Second, we consider whether allegedly defamatory statements made about a business's product provide a basis for defamation per se or for business disparagement. We conclude that the absolute privilege affords parties to litigation the same protection from liability that exists for an attorney for defamatory statements made during, or in anticipation of, judicial proceedings. Additionally, we conclude that when allegedly defamatory statements concern a business's product and the plaintiff seeks to redress injury to economic interest, the claim is one for business disparagement, not defamation per se.

adversarial system

The U.S. legal system in which litigants, typically represented by attorneys, argue their respective sides in a dispute before an impartial judge and jury; often contrasted with an inquisitorial system in which an accused is questioned by offi cials without rights of defense in a relentless search for the truth.

verdict

The factfinding by a jury. For example, in a civil case, the jury might find the defendant liable in a dollar amount; in a criminal case, the verdict is usually guilty or not guilty of each criminal charge.

judgment

The official decision of a court about the rights and claims of each side in a lawsuit; usually a final decision after trial based on findings of fact and making conclusions of law.

appellee

The party against whom an appeal is brought.

appellant

The party bringing an appeal against the other party, the appellee. appellee

substitution of judgment

The standard of review of conclusions of law made by a lower court.

clearly erroneous

The test or standard used at the appellate level to determine if judicial factfinding at trial constitutes prejudicial error. Highly deferential toward the trial court.

substantial evidence

The test or standard used at the appellate level to determine if jury factfinding at trial constitutes prejudicial error. Often used interchangeably with clearly erroneous.

State v. Deines

There is no reason to view with distrust the failure of a police officer to record events creating particularized suspicion for a traffic stop. Denial of motion to suppress was correct. Pg (130) Issue: whether the failure of a police officer to record events creating particularized suspicion for a traffic stop should be viewed with distrust in the judicial assessment of particularized suspicion, hen the means to record events are readily available to the officer. Holding: Officer Briggs had particularized suspicion to stop denies was not clearly erroneous and the denial of denies motion to suppress was correct.