NAME

Question Types


Start With


Question Limit

of 93 available terms

Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads

5 Written Questions

5 Matching Questions

  1. Civil Burden of Proof
  2. Embezzlement
  3. Legal Remedies
  4. Bullock v. Phillip-Morris USA, Inc.
  5. Personal Jurisdiction
  1. a 1. Money
    2. Monetary Compensation
    3. Loss of profits
    4. Breach of contracts
  2. b The trespatory taking and asportation of the personal property of another while in lawful custody or posession
  3. c 1. Preponderance of evidence
    2. Clear and convincing evidence
  4. d 1. In Personam
    2. In Rem
  5. e I: Is this a viable case of product liability, in terms of design defect?
    R: Where a seller, manufacturer, or retailer places a defective product in the stream of commerce, the user, consumer, or bystander may have a successful lawsuit under a product liability suit
    A: The jury confirmed that there was a design defect, as the benefits didn't not outweigh the risks of the product
    C: Bullock was successful and Phillip-Morris had to pay punitive damages

5 Multiple Choice Questions

  1. Reasonable beyond reasonable doubt
  2. One may use both deadly or non-deadly force where the other was also privileged to use the same amount of force, protecting the victim, not the wrongdoer
  3. I: Is the arbitration agreement valid?
    R: The agreement at issue is both procedurally and substantially unconscionable
    A: The agreement was unconscionable or it favored one party more than the other; In this case, GeoEx made the plaintiffs come to California in order to mediate or arbitrate, limited the damages rewarded to the plaintiff, and lead the plaintiff to believe that other entities use the same agreements, implying that they lacked bargaining power
    C: The arbitration agreement is not valid, so GeoEx's motion to compel arbitration is denied
  4. The trespatory taking of a person
  5. The intentional placing one without reasonable means of ingress or egress

5 True/False Questions

  1. Modern Law ArsonThe malicious burning of any structure

          

  2. AssaultThe intentional placing one in reasonable apprehension of an immediate harmful or offensive touching

          

  3. Infancy1. Irresistible Impulse
    2. Majority Rule

          

  4. Roach v. SternI: Should Sisupan be charged with embezzlement, even though he returned the money?
    R: The trespatory taking and asporation of the personal property of another while in lawful custody or possession
    A: Sisupan was not given permission to take the money; the company entrusted him with the money in certain situations, and possession to get a co-worker fired was not one of them; simply returning the money doesn't mean he shouldn't be charged because that is not a defense to embezzlement
    C: Court ruled that he was guilty of a felony offense of embezzlement

          

  5. MediationA mutually agreed upon 3rd person, a mediator, listens to the facts and gives non-binding opinions

          

Create Set