Terms in this set (20)
Page 54 #6-Ms. Tant of New York City recently sued Mr. Bloom, also of New York City. She claimed
that he had run into and injured her while he was jogging. She asked for $50,000 in damages. When she filed her suit in federal district court, Mr. Bloom's attorney immediately moved for the case to be dismissed from the federal court for two reasons. What were they? -
It should be done in state court since both people in dispute are from the same state. Also, for a case to go to federal court, there must be more than $75,000 in dispute.
Page 70 #5-Phillips developed a scheme to generate funds by sending bogus bills for small amounts for District Sanitation Services to residents of affluent areas. Enough people paid these bills to make the practice quite profitable. What crime has Phillips committed?
Phillips committed the crime of false pretenses. He obtained the money by lying about a past or existing fact.
Page 70 #6 A corporation was cited and charged with illegal pollution for dumping chemical wastes Chapter 4 Criminal Law and Procedure into a river. The dumping happened when an employee mistakenly opened the wrong valve. The company pleaded not guilty because the dumping was not intentional. Neither the company nor the employee knew of the ban on dumping this particular chemical. Is either argument a good defense? Why or why not?
Neither the company nor the employee can assert as a valid defense the fact that it did not know that this particular act was criminal. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. However, the employee and the business may escape criminal responsibility on the grounds that there was no criminal intent.
Page 19#8-If a legislature enacted a law that made it illegal to shout "fire" in a movie theater, would the ethical character of the law reflect consequences- based reasoning, rule-based reasoning, or both?
This is both consequence based reasoning and rule based reasoning. It is consequence based reasoning because there is no good that will come from yelling fire in a movie theater if there is no fire. It is rule based reasoning because they are breaking the actual law that a legislature enacted by yelling fire in a movie theater.
Page 15#11- Sonoma County passed a law making it legal to drive 65 mph on freeways inside the county. A state law limited all vehicles anywhere in the state to 55 mph. What is the valid speed limit on freeways inside this county?
The state speed limit takes authority so the speed limit is 55 mph the county . As long as they have jurisdiction.The state has more power the county, state rule supersedes the county ruling
Page 96#8-Betty was at a baseball game seated one row behind a famous movie star. When Betty stood up to cheer, she was bumped by the person beside her. She lost her balance and fell into the lap of the movie star. He sued her for the tort of assault. Who prevails?
Betty would prevail because she did not intentionally fall into the lap of the movie star, she was bumped by the person beside her. The tort of assault is only valid when someone intentionally tries to threaten you will harmful or offensive touching. This was not the case in this situation.
Page 94- Bart broke his leg while playing tennis at night on a dark city tennis court without installed lighting. Do you think he would win a judgment against the city for his injury? Why or why not?
Assumption of risk is when the plaintiff is aware of possible danger of doing something but decides to do take the risk anyway. For example taking a shortcut through a construction area that has signs saying no trespassing, danger ahead. Bart was aware of the possible danger of playing with no lights and he decided to risk it and play anyway.
Page 103#21 Yardley and Whipple, ages 12 and 13, intentionally threw stones which smashed 57 windows in an old warehouse. The warehouse had been standing vacant for nine months. Yardley and Whipple were caught and disciplined by the juvenile court. Then the owner of the warehouse sued them and their parents for damages. The girls said they were "just having fun and not hurting anyone because the place was empty." Who, if anyone, is liable and why?
Both the parents and the children are liable because in a tort, the defense of being at an age that doesn't allow you to know right from wrong is not valid. The parents are liable because of the lack of supervision of the kids. This is called vicarious liability but it doesn't excuse the people who committed the act.
Page 11-Learn the allocations of powers between state and government
The Federal government allocates powers between federal and state governments. In general, the Constitution gives the Federal government power to regulate both foreign and interstate commerce. Interstate commerce occurs between two or more states. The power to regulate intrastate commerce within one state is left to that state.
Page 61#19- Gomez wanted to sue Shapiro for failure to complete work under their contract but could not afford the expenses and time delays associated with litigation. What alternatives are available to resolve this matter?
Three alternatives instead of sueing is straight negotiation, mediation, and arbitration. Straight negotiation is a settlement between 2 parties without going to court. Mediation is when a mediator comes in and tries to develop a solution acceptable to both sides of the dispute. This is not legally binding. Arbitration is when an arbitrator comes in and holds an informal hearing and this is legally binding.
Page 61#20- If you were called to testify as a witness in a friends criminal trial would you have the moral strength to tell the complete truth even if your friend might be convicted as a result
If I were called to testify as a witness in a friend's criminal trial, I would have the moral strength to tell the complete truth. Before coming up to testify a witness must take an oath before the judge to tell the absolute truth. This means it is your obligation to tell the truth no matter what. I would rather justice be served and lose a friend than the other way around. My friend would have to face the punishments of what he or she did wrong.
What are Criminal and Civil Wrongs?
A criminal wrong is a wrong against society. A civil wrong is a wrong against an individual. Civil wrongs are called torts.
Page 31 Give examples of SYSTEMS OF CHECKS AND BALANCES. Not just what they mean but identify the systems
Checks and Balances- Under the system of Checks and Balances, it created a balance of power between the legislative, judicial, and executive branches of government. Under this system, each branch of government has the power to limit each other and use the power of another branch. For example, all bills for taxing must originate in the house. However, a majority vote of both bodies is required for passage of any bill, including tax bills. Executive Branch can veto bills from the Legislative Branch, but the Legislative Branch can override the veto
Page 25 Identify why the Articles of confederations was flawed, and list those specific reasons why
Articles of Confederation- The states had more power than the federal government. Many people felt the need for a stronger central government than the one the articles of confederation provided. After fighting in the revolutionary war they were afraid to have a strong central government. But the government couldn't enforce taxes and couldn't draft people in the US Army
Page 69 Identify what consists of someone committing the crime of receiving stolen property. Moreover define: false pretenses, forgery, and bribery
Crime of Receiving Stolen Property- Knowingly receiving stolen property consists of either receiving or buying property known to be stolen, with intent to deprive the rightful owner of the property. ONe who receives stolen property is known as a fence. Even if one receives property and doesn't know it was stolen, he or she could still be prosecuted. False pretenses is lying about a past or existing fact in order to obtain something. Forgery -falsely altering a document to defraud another. Bribery Offering to compensate them for information or use of power in office. Bribery is the unlawful offering of giving something of value to an official to alter their performance of carrying out his or her legal duty.
Page 5 Find out the 4 stages of the growth of law
Four Stages of Growth of Law- The Four stages of growth of Law are revenge, (eye for an eye) an appointed leader to settle disputes (usually gets the injured party to receive an award of money or goods), system of courts, and Prevention (knowing that your actions will lead to punishments)
Page 39 and 40- Roth vs. United States Miller vs California (Know how each dealt with 1st amendment rights vs. obscenity)
Defense was 1st amendment (Freedom of speech)
Ruled that all speech was guaranteed First Amendment protection unless it was "Socially important" or "Obscenity(" Obscenity is not protected under the First amendment
Miller vs Cali-Obscenity depends on the states and all vary (community affected has the right to make the decision so the receiver state gets to decide whether it's Obscene or not)
Page 57 Juvenile courts and trial courts and give examples on how two court systems treat people differently
Juvenile courts deal with people under the age of majority and trial courts deal with people above the age of majority. In most states the age of majority is 18. The two court systems treat people differently because juvenile courts are closed to the public, there is less severity of the sentence, and the punishment is rehab while trial courts are open to the public, have a more severe sentence and they can send the defendant to jail. does not carry over to your adult record
Page 73-What are the 3 types of substantive defenses to crimes
self defense- defending yourself or others from offensive touching, insanity- the inability to know right from wrong and immunity (freedom of testifying)
pg 94 What does contributory and comparative negligence mean?
Contributory is when 2 parties are both at fault so neither can sue. Comparative negligence is if both parties contribute, someone decides who was more at fault and that person can be sued. For example if someone 80% against someone who is 20% at fault, the person who is 20% at fault can only sue for 80% of damages. Contributory example is doesn't matter what percentage of wrong one person has one can't sue the other. Some States feel this is unfair so changed to comparative