
CASE 3.1,Wal-Mart Stores,Inc.v.Dukes (2011) ,involved a question of whether:
A) Wal-Mart should be properly sued in federal vs.state court.
B) there was sufficient commonality among Wal-Mart employees to certify the group as a class.
C) one Wal-Mart employee could represent over one million other employees.
D) the employees had waived their rights to arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q43: A _ reverses the jury verdict on
Q45: Fact Pattern 3-1
Bruce lived in Tennessee and
Q46: Federal diversity jurisdiction exists when:
A) a lawsuit
Q47: When a case is dismissed _,the _
Q47: _ is the voluntary give-and-take parties engage
Q49: The _ is a term referencing the
Q51: CASE 3.2,American Express Co.v.Italian Colors Restaurant(2013)before the
Q53: Fact Pattern 3-2
Sally tells you that she
Q54: The case discussed in the text,Upjohn Co.v.United
Q55: A "spoliation inference" means that documents not
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents