Dynamic business law 4e kubasek 4e CH03

Chapter 3 Hypothetical Case 2 cont'd • Officer Perkins asked the not-so-polite occupant to open the door, to which she responded, "I ain't comin' down there, and if you ain't got a warra

Chapter 3

The U.S Legal System

Copyright © 2017 Hill Education All rights reserved No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of

McGraw-Hill Education.

• LO3-1: What are the different types of

jurisdiction a court must have before it can

render a binding decision in a case?

• LO3-2: What is venue?

• LO3-3: How is our dual court system structured?

• LO3-4: What are the threshold requirements that

must be met before a court will hear a case?

• LO3-5: What are the steps in civil litigation?

Chapter 3 Hypothetical Case 1

• Sara Burns cares deeply for her best friend Allison Lefevers, even though she does not

care for her timidity Last month, Lefevers's co-worker, Thomas Benfield, informed

their supervisor that Lefevers had wrongfully taken hundreds of dollars from the

company's operational account for her own personal use After an extensive

investigation, the company concluded that Benfield's allegations were baseless,

originating from ill will between the two co-workers The company allowed Lefevers to

keep her job, and terminated Benfield for his wrongful conduct

Burns has encouraged Lefevers to pursue a civil action against Benfield for defamation

(even though he lost his job, Burns has determined that he is far from

"judgment-proof"), but Lefevers has politely declined, saying that she does not want to "fight the

fight." Frustrated with her friend's lack of fortitude, Burns plans to file a civil action on

behalf of Lefevers, listing her friend as the plaintiff, and Thomas Benfield as the

defendant Should she recover a judgment in favor of her friend, and should execution

on the judgment be successful, Burns will turn any proceeds over to Lefevers

• Can Sara Burns proceed in a civil action against Thomas Benfield on behalf of her

friend Allison Lefevers? Why or why not? 3-3

Chapter 3 Hypothetical Case 2

• Officer Brian Perkins was having a difficult Monday morning For the past three hours, he

was responsible for serving process in three civil cases (As Chapter 3 indicates, service of

process is the procedure by which courts present litigation documents to defendants Those

documents typically consist of a complaint, which specifies the factual and legal basis for

the lawsuit and the relief the plaintiff seeks, and a summons, a court order that notifies the

defendant of the lawsuit and explains how and when to respond to the complaint.) For the

first civil case, Merriwether v Alstot, Officer Perkins attempted to serve the defendant

Harry Alstott at his home, but no one appeared to be there For the second civil case, Setliff

v Sanders, the person answering the door claimed the defendant, Marshall Sanders, did

not live there, and that he did not even know who Marshall Sanders was Leaving the

premises, Officer Perkins surmised that the residential address indicated on the summons

was incorrect Either that, or the person who answered the door was lying.

For his third attempt at service of process that morning, in a lawsuit captioned Jackson v

Graves, Officer Perkins drove to the home of Laticia M Graves at 721 Magnolia Street

Officer Perkins knocked on the door of the dilapidated house, and although no one

answered the door, a second-story window opened almost immediately A female in the

Chapter 3 Hypothetical Case 2

(cont'd)

• Officer Perkins asked the not-so-polite occupant to open the door, to which she

responded, "I ain't comin' down there, and if you ain't got a warrant, you ain't

comin' in." Frustrated, Officer Perkins replied, "Well, I have civil papers to serve

you, ma'am, and if you won't come down to get them, I'm going to put them in

your mailbox." The response was, "I ain't comin' to the door."

Officer Perkins immediately proceeded to the mailbox, and put the complaint

and summons in the matter of Jackson v Graves in the box The address on the

mailbox indicated 721 Magnolia Street In his notes, Officer Graves wrote that

the defendant, Laticia Graves, had been served with process on Monday,

September 13, 2015 at 11:47 a.m As he entered his patrol car, Officer Perkins

looked backed at the second-story window from which he had received his

impolite greeting The woman had since closed the window, and was watching

his every move

• Did Officer Perkins effectively serve process on the defendant, Laticia Graves?

Types of Jurisdiction

• Original jurisdiction:

The power to hear

and decide cases

when they first enter

the legal system

• Appellate jurisdiction:

The power to review previous judicial

decisions to determine whether trial courts erred in their decisions

Types of Jurisdiction

• In personam

jurisdiction: The

power to render a

decision affecting the

rights of the specific

persons before the

court

• Subject-matter jurisdiction: The power to hear certain kinds of cases

3-7

Subject-Matter Jurisdiction:

Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction

• Admiralty cases

• Bankruptcy cases

• Federal criminal prosecutions

• Cases in which one state sues another state

• Claims against the United States

• Federal patent, trademark, and copyright claims

• Other claims involving federal statutes that

specify exclusive federal jurisdiction

Subject-Matter Jurisdiction: State

Jurisdiction

• All cases not falling under exclusive federal jurisdiction

3-9

Subject-Matter Jurisdiction:

Concurrent Federal Jurisdiction

• Federal-question cases

• Diversity-of-citizenship cases

What Is Venue?

• Venue: The court's geographic location,

determined by each state's statutes

• Change of venue

• When the court location where plaintiff

files case is inconvenient to defendant

• If defendant believes it will be difficult to

select an unbiased jury in present court

location

3-11

The U.S Dual Court System

• Federal

• State

The Federal Court System

• Federal trial courts (U.S district courts)

• Intermediate courts of appeal

• United States Supreme Court

3-13

State Court Systems

Threshold Requirements for

Litigation

• Standing (to sue)

• Case or controversy (justiciable

controversy)

• Ripeness

3-15

Steps in Civil Litigation:

The Pretrial Stage

Steps in Civil Litigation:

Steps in Civil Litigation:

Steps in Civil Litigation:

Appellate Procedure

• Either party or both parties may appeal a

judge's decision

• Requires a prejudicial error of law

• Must file notice of appeal

• Appellant must file a brief

• Oral arguments

• Decision

3-19

Appellate Court Decision-Making

Chapter 3 Hypothetical Case 3

• The mayor of Forbes, Mississippi was given video evidence that Brenda

Hollingsworth, the town's fire chief, was taking bribes from a company that

boards up fire-damaged buildings in return for letting them know first when a

fire occurs The mayor demanded her resignation, telling her she would be fired

if she did not resign, and drew up an agreement that served as her resignation

and also granted her a $4,000 severance package Hollingsworth signed the

agreement and accepted the severance package, but then immediately filed a

lawsuit in the state court system on the grounds of wrongful discharge and

defamation, as the mayor told other members of the town government why

Hollingsworth resigned The county court reviewed the suit and dismissed it

Hollingsworth appeals the county court's decision to the state appeals court The

appeals court reviews the information in the case

• Do you believe that Hollingsworth's appeal is groundless? Or will the appeals

court hear the case? What is the significance of the facts that she signed the

agreement and accepted the severance package, and that the mayor told others

about Hollingsworth's transgressions?

3-21

Chapter 3 Hypothetical Case 4

female in an apartment burglary During the jury selection process, Prosecutor Wallace

Forbes exercises only two peremptory challenges, excusing from service the only two

African Americans in the jury An all-white jury is eventually empanelled, and Defendant

Woodson is convicted of first-degree murder, with life imprisonment imposed as

punishment.

After the jury verdict is announced, Prosecutor Forbes is questioned by the local media

concerning his exercise of the peremptory challenges Prosecutor Forbes explains that

race was not a factor in his decision, but that the two potential jurors were excused

"because they have facial hair, and as a matter of practice, I do not want individuals with

facial hair serving on my jury." Further, Prosecutor Forbes states, "I categorically deny

that race played any factor whatsoever in the jury selection process."

error, and remand the case to the trial court level to be retried; 2) vacate (nullify) the

jury verdict, and dismiss the charges against Defendant Woodson; or