Deck 1: Law and Legal Reasoning

Question 1

Spotlight on AOL-Common Law. AOL, LLC, mistakenly made public the personal information of 650,000 of its members. The members filed a suit, alleging violations of California law. AOL asked the court to dismiss the suit on the basis of a "forum-selection" clause in its member agreement that designates Virginia courts as the place where member disputes will be tried. Under a decision of the United States Supreme Court, a forum-selection clause is unenforceable "if enforcement would contravene a strong public policy of the forum in which suit is brought." California courts have declared in other cases that the AOL clause contravenes a strong public policy. If the court applies the doctrine of stare decisis, will it dismiss the suit? Explain. [ Doe 1 v. AOL LLC, 552 F.3d 1077 (9th Cir. 2009)]
(See page 6.)

Answer 1

Supreme Court is the highest authority in. All the other courts have to oblige with the Supreme Court. The basis on which decisions are taken in Supreme Court has to be the basis for other courts in the country.
Stare decisis is the doctrine of principles set by Supreme Court of United States that enforces certain common laws that binds the other courts and cases filed under their jurisdiction.
As per this case, where the private information of the employees got leaked and a case has been sued against the management and the company that led the disclosure of the information. The case will not get dismissed because, AOL is a huge body and the case that has been filed for the breach of employee personal information is a big issue and requires a proper investigation. A general rule will not be applied in this case of stare decisis.

Question 2

Business Case Problem with Sample Answer- Reading Citations
Assume that you want to read the entire court opinion in the case of United States v. Yi, 704 F.3d 800 (9th Cir. 2013). Refer to the subsection entitled "Finding Case Law" in this chapter, and then explain specifically where you would find the court's opinion.
(See page 14.)

Answer 2

consists of two types of courts State courts and Federal courts. The courts opinion will be present in the subsection of the cases following State court decisions, regional reporters, case citations, federal court decisions, unpublished opinions, old case law.
Here state laws are the local body of courts and federal courts are the national level of courts. Regional reporters are the distributed reporters regionally who report to the cases at all tenures. Most of the state trial court decisions are not published in books.
Case citation is the original description of the case that writes about the cases that have actually occurred in the environment. Federal court decisions are the binding principles that allow the citations of other cases as the guiding principles.
The official edition of US Supreme Court decisions is the US reports that are published by the federal government.
Thus, the court's opinion will be found specifically on the federal court opinion and the state court opinion.

Question 3

A QUESTION OF ETHICS: The Common Law Tradition.
On July 5, 1884, Dudley, Stephens, and Brooks - "all able-bodied English seamen"-and a teenage English boy were cast adrift in a lifeboat following a storm at sea. They had no water with them in the boat, and all they had for sustenance were two one-pound tins of turnips. On July 24, Dudley proposed that one of the four in the lifeboat be sacrificed to save the others. Stephens agreed with Dudley, but Brooks refused to consent-and the boy was never asked for his opinion. On July 25, Dudley killed the boy, and the three men then fed on the boy's body and blood. Four days later, a passing vessel rescued the men. They were taken to England and tried for the murder of the boy. If the men had not fed on the boy's body, they would probably have died of starvation within the four-day period. The boy, who was in a much weaker condition, would likely have died before the rest. [Regina v. Dudley and Stephens, 14 Q.B.D. (Queen's Bench Division, England) 273 (1884)]
?
(a) The basic question in this case is whether the survivors should be subject to penalties under English criminal law, given the men's unusual circumstances. Were the defendants' actions necessary but unethical? Explain your reasoning. What ethical issues might be involved here?
(b) Should judges ever have the power to look beyond the written "letter of the law" in making their decisions? Why or why not?

Answer 3

A question of ethics:
a). The question presented is whether the duty to save one's own life is more important than preserving another's life. There is no right answer here.
The first ethical decision is whether one man's life ever trumps another's life. Other issues include whether a man ever has a right to take another's life regardless of the circumstances, whether all three men should have consented; whether the boy should have been given an option; if Brooks is as guilty as the other men by eating the boy's body even though he did not actually kill the boy; and if the men should have just waited for the boy to die rather than killing him.
The act of killing the boy could have been necessary to preserve the men's lives, although there is no way to actually determine that fact.
However, it could still be unethical to take another's life under the presupposition that no man should take another's life.
b). Judges do have flexibility in applying statutes and precedents. A court can look at a number of factors in making a decision including legal principles, fairness, social values, and customs.
This is because no statute or common law can take into account every single circumstance occurring in a case. Furthermore, judges vary in personalities, value systems and intellects; thus, they each bring something different to the interpretation of the "letter of the law."

Question 4

Court Opinions. Read through the subsection in this chapter entitled "Decisions and Opinions." (See page 20.)
?
(a) One group will explain the difference between a concurring opinion and a majority opinion.
(b) Another group will outline the difference between a concurring opinion and a dissenting opinion.
(c) A third group will explain why judges and justices write concurring and dissenting opinions, given that these opinions will not affect the outcome of the case at hand, which has already been decided by majority vote.

Question 5

Binding versus Persuasive Authority. A county court in Illinois is deciding a case involving an issue that has never been addressed before in that state's courts. The Iowa Supreme Court, however, recently decided a case involving a very similar fact pattern. Is the Illinois court obligated to follow the Iowa Supreme Court's decision on the issue? If the United States Supreme Court had decided a similar case, would that decision be binding on the Illinois court? Explain.

Question 6

Suppose that the California legislature passes a law that severely restricts carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles in that state. A group of automobile manufacturers files suit against the state of California to prevent the enforcement of the law. The automakers claim that a federal law already sets fuel economy standards nationwide and that fuel economy standards are essentially the same as carbon dioxide emission standards. According to the automobile manufacturers, it is unfair to allow California to impose more stringent regulations than those set by the federal law. Using the information presented in the chapter, answer the following questions.
1. Who are the parties (the plaintiffs and the defendant) in this lawsuit?
2. Are the plaintiffs seeking a legal remedy or an equitable remedy?
3. What is the primary source of the law that is at issue here?
4. Where would you look to find the relevant California and federal laws?

Question 7

Sources of Law This chapter discussed a number of sources of American law. Which source of law takes priority in the following situations, and why?
?
(a) A federal statute conflicts with the U.S. Constitution.
(b) A federal statute conflicts with a state constitutional provision.
(c) A state statute conflicts with the common law of that state.
(d) A state constitutional amendment conflicts with the U.S. Constitution.

Question 8

Stare Decisis In this chapter, we stated that the doctrine of stare decisis "became a cornerstone of the English and American judicial systems." What does stare decisis mean, and why has this doctrine been so fundamental to the development of our legal tradition?

Question 9

Remedies. Assume that Arthur Rabe is suing Xavier Sanchez for breaching a contract in which Sanchez promised to sell Rabe a painting by Vincent Van Gogh for $30 million. (See page 6.)
?
(a) In this lawsuit, who is the plaintiff and who is the defendant?
(b) Suppose that Rabe wants Sanchez to perform the contract as promised. What remedy would Rabe seek from the court?
(c) Now suppose that Rabe wants to cancel the contract because Sanchez fraudulently misrepresented the painting as an original Van Gogh when in fact it is a copy. What remedy would Rabe seek?
(d) Will the remedy Rabe seeks in either situation be a remedy at law or a remedy in equity? What is the difference between legal and equitable remedies?
(e) Suppose that the trial court finds in Rabe's favor and grants one of these remedies. Sanchez then appeals the decision to a higher court. On appeal, which party will be the appellant (or petitioner), and which party will be the appellee (or respondent)?