Question 1

D'Antoni files a suit in a federal district court against Enya. D'Antoni loses the suit, appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and loses again. D'Antoni asks the United States Supreme Court to hear the case. The Court is​
A) ​not required to hear the case.
B) ​required to hear the case because D'Antoni lost in a federal court.
C) ​required to hear the case because D'Antoni lost in a lower court.
D) ​required to hear the case because it is an appeal.

Accepted Answer

The United States Supreme Court is not required to hear every case that is appealed to it. The Court may choose to hear cases that involve significant legal or constitutional issues, but it has the discretion to decline to hear cases that do not meet its criteria. Therefore, since the question does not provide any information indicating that the case involves significant legal or constitutional issues, it is safe to assume that the Court is not required to hear the case.

Question 2

Carol files a suit against Andy in a state trial court and loses. Carol can​
A) ​not take her case any higher in the court system.
B) ​insist that the United States Supreme Court hear her case.
C) ​plead her case before an appellate court.
D) ​plead her case before a small claims court.

Accepted Answer

Carol can plead her case before an appellate court, which can review the decision made by the trial court. She cannot take her case directly to the United States Supreme Court unless there is a constitutional issue involved, and small claims court is only for cases involving small amounts of money.

Question 3

Kari and Lillian, who are citizens of Mississippi, are involved in a case related to the adoption of their child. Over this case, Mississippi state courts have​
A) ​concurrent jurisdiction with federal courts.
B) ​concurrent jurisdiction with other state courts.
C) ​exclusive jurisdiction.
D) ​no jurisdiction.

Accepted Answer

Mississippi state courts have exclusive jurisdiction over cases related to the adoption of a child involving Mississippi citizens. This means that no other state or federal court has authority to hear this case.

Question 4

McHenry, a New York resident, files a suit in a New York state court against OneWorld Inc., a company based in California. OneWorld's only contact with McHenry is the company's app, which McHenry downloaded while traveling across the United States. According to the sliding-scale analysis, the factor most likely to confer jurisdiction on the New York court is​
A) ​the geographical distance between McHenry and OneWorld.
B) ​the degree of interactivity via the app between McHenry and OneWorld.
C) ​OneWorld's location when the app was created.
D) ​McHenry's location when the app was downloaded.

Accepted Answer

The degree of interactivity via the app between McHenry and OneWorld is the factor most likely to confer jurisdiction on the New York court according to the sliding-scale analysis. The fact that McHenry downloaded and used the app while traveling across the United States shows a certain level of purposeful availment and interaction with the company, making it more likely that OneWorld could reasonably expect to be sued in New York. The other factors are not as relevant in this case.

Question 5

Sforza files a suit against Thieu. If this suit is like most cases, it will be​
A) ​dismissed during a trial.
B) ​settled before a trial.
C) ​resolved only after a trial.
D) ​appealed to a higher court.

Accepted Answer

Most civil cases are settled before a trial, often through negotiation or mediation. Therefore, it is likely that Sforza's suit against Thieu will be settled before a trial takes place.

Question 6

Tyler, a citizen of Utah, files a suit in a Utah state court against Virtual Sales Corporation, a Washington state company that does business in Utah. The court has original jurisdiction, which means that​
A) ​the case is being heard for the first time.
B) ​the court has a unique method of deciding whether to hear a case.
C) ​the court has unusual procedural rules.
D) ​the subject matter of the suit is interesting and new.

Accepted Answer

"Original jurisdiction" means that the court has the authority to hear the case for the first time, rather than on appeal from a lower court or another jurisdiction.

Question 7

The Montana Supreme Court rules against Natural Grocery Mart in a case against One Stop 2 Shop Stores, Inc. Natural Grocery files an appeal with the United States Supreme Court. The Court does not hear the case. This​
A) ​is a decision on the merits that has value as a precedent.
B) ​indicates agreement with the Montana court's decision.
C) ​means nothing.
D) ​means that the Montana court's decision is the law in Montana.

Accepted Answer

When the US Supreme Court does not hear a case, it means that the decision of the lower court (in this case, the Montana Supreme Court) stands and is the law in that state. Therefore, the best choice is D.

Question 8

David, an Alabama resident, files a suit in an Alabama court against QuickAds, an Internet company based in Georgia that provides advertising services. QuickAds only contact with persons in Alabama has been through QuickAds's passive advertising. The Alabama court is​
A) ​likely to have jurisdiction over the case.
B) ​not likely to have jurisdiction over the case.
C) ​likely to refer the case to a higher district court.
D) ​likely to refer the case to an appellate court.

Accepted Answer

QuickAds's passive advertising in Alabama does not establish sufficient minimum contacts with the state to give the Alabama court jurisdiction over the company.

Question 9

Stephan wins his suit against Tidewater Boats, Inc. Tidewater's best ground for appeal is the trial court's interpretation of​
A) ​the demeanor of the witnesses during the trial.
B) ​what happened to give rise to the dispute.
C) ​the dealings between the parties before the suit.
D) ​the law that applied to the issues in the case.

Accepted Answer

The best ground for appeal in a case where the plaintiff has won is often the trial court's interpretation of the law that applies to the issues in the case. This is because a mistake or error in the application of the law can have a significant impact on the outcome of the case, and can potentially create grounds for appeal. The other factors listed (A, B, and C) are unlikely to be strong grounds for appeal in most cases.

Question 10

Delia files a suit against Eduardo in a Florida state court over the ownership of a boat docked in a Florida harbor. Both Delia and Eduardo are residents of Georgia. Eduardo could ask for a change of venue on the ground that Georgia​
A) ​has a sufficient stake in the matter.
B) ​has jurisdiction.
C) ​has sufficient minimum contacts with the parties.
D) ​is a more convenient location to hold the trial.

Accepted Answer

Eduardo could ask for a change of venue on the ground that Georgia is a more convenient location to hold the trial since both parties are residents of Georgia.

Question 11

The case of Max v. National Credit Co. is heard in a trial court. The case of O! Boy! Ice Cream Co. v. Pecan Corp. is heard in an appellate court. The difference between a trial and an appellate court is whether​
A) ​a trial is being held.
B) ​the court is appealing.
C) ​the parties question how the law applies to their dispute.
D) ​the subject matter of the case involves complex facts.

Accepted Answer

Trial courts are where trials are held, involving witnesses, evidence presentation, and a determination of the facts of a case. Appellate courts, on the other hand, review the application of the law by trial courts, without holding trials themselves.

Question 12

The Kentucky Supreme Court rules against Luther in a case against Motor Cars, Inc. Luther wants to appeal the case to the United States Supreme Court. Luther must ask the Court to issue a writ of​
A) appeal.
B) ​certiorari.
C) ​jurisdiction.
D) ​summons.

Accepted Answer

Luther would need to ask the United States Supreme Court to issue a writ of certiorari in order to appeal the case. This writ requests that the Court review the lower court's decision and potentially overturn it.

Question 13

Laredo loses his suit against McLain in a North Dakota state trial court. Laredo appeals to a state intermediate court of appeals and loses again. Laredo would appeal next to​
A) ​the American Arbitration Association.
B) ​the North Dakota Supreme Court.
C) ​the United States Supreme Court.
D) ​the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

Accepted Answer

Laredo would appeal to the North Dakota Supreme Court as it is the highest court in the state and further appeals would be to federal courts. Option A is incorrect as the American Arbitration Association is a private organization used for dispute resolution by parties who agree to use its services. Option C is incorrect as the United States Supreme Court only hears cases that involve federal law or constitutional issues, and this case is being heard at the state level. Option D is incorrect as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit hears appeals from several states in the Midwest, including North Dakota, but it is not the next step in the appellate process after the state intermediate court of appeals.

Question 14

Olivia, a citizen of Nebraska, wants to file a suit against Micah, a citizen of Kansas. Their diversity of citizenship may be a basis for​
A) ​no court to exercise jurisdiction.
B) ​a federal court to exercise original jurisdiction.
C) ​a state court to exercise appellate jurisdiction.
D) ​the United States Supreme Court to refuse jurisdiction.

Accepted Answer

Diversity of citizenship is a basis for federal court to exercise original jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Therefore, Olivia can file a suit against Micah in a federal court.

Question 15

First Community Credit Union and General Hydraulics. Inc., have their dispute resolved in arbitration. Before determining the award, the arbitrator meets with First Community's representative to discuss the dispute without General Hydraulics' representative being present. If this meeting substantially prejudices General Hydraulics' rights, a court will most likely​
A) ​compel arbitration.
B) ​review the merits of the dispute.
C) ​review the sufficiency of the evidence.
D) ​set aside any award.

Accepted Answer

The meeting between the arbitrator and First Community's representative without the presence of General Hydraulics' representative violates the principle of due process and fair hearing. If General Hydraulics' rights were substantially prejudiced by this meeting, a court may set aside any award made in the arbitration.

Question 16

Salina files a suit against Tanner. Before going to trial, the parties, with their attorneys, meet to try to resolve their dispute. A third party suggests or proposes a resolution, which the parties may or may not adopt. This is​
A) ​arbitration.
B) ​mediation.
C) ​negotiation.
D) ​not a legitimate form of dispute resolution.

Accepted Answer

The scenario described is mediation, where a neutral third party (the mediator) assists the disputing parties in reaching a mutually acceptable agreement. Unlike arbitration, the mediator does not make a decision for the parties.

Question 17

All Bikes, Inc., a firm in Wisconsin, advertises on the Web. A court in Ohio would be most likely to exercise jurisdiction over All Bikes if the firm​
A) ​did substantial business with Ohio residents over the Internet.
B) ​interacted with any Ohio resident through its Web site.
C) ​only engaged in passive advertising on the Web.
D) ​suddenly removed its ad from the Internet.

Accepted Answer

According to the "minimum contacts" requirement for personal jurisdiction, a court can exert jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant only if the defendant has established sufficient contacts with the forum state. In the case of Internet advertising, a court can exercise jurisdiction if the defendant had substantial business with residents in the forum state over the Internet. Therefore, choice A is the most likely scenario for the Ohio court to exert jurisdiction over All Bikes, Inc.

Question 18

Milo files a suit against Nick in an Ohio state court, noting that Nick operates a Web site through which Ohio residents have done substantial business with him. The court is most likely to have jurisdiction over Nick if Milo's claim arises from​
A) ​anything an Ohio resident has done.
B) ​Nick's Web site activities.
C) ​nothing an Ohio resident has done.
D) ​something other than Nick's Web site.

Accepted Answer

Jurisdiction over Nick is most likely if Milo's claim arises from Nick's Web site activities, as this provides a sufficient connection to Ohio for the court to exercise jurisdiction. If Milo's claim does not arise from Nick's Web site activities (such as if it arises from something an Ohio resident has done or something other than Nick's Web site), the court may not have jurisdiction over Nick.

Question 19

Mediocrité, Inc., makes and sells goods that are substandard. Naomi, who has never bought or used a Mediocrité item, files a suit against the firm, alleging that its products are defective. The company's best ground for dismissal of the suit is that Naomi does not have​
A) ​certiorari.
B) ​jurisdiction.
C) ​standing.
D) ​sufficient minimum contacts.

Accepted Answer

The company's best ground for dismissal of the suit is that Naomi does not have standing, as she has not been harmed by Mediocrité's products since she has never bought or used them. Certiorari is a form of review by a higher court, jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court to hear a case, and sufficient minimum contacts refers to a concept in personal jurisdiction. None of these are the best ground for dismissal in this scenario.

Question 20

Marty files a suit against Norah in a state court over an employment contract. The case proceeds to trial, after which the court renders a verdict. The case is appealed to an appellate court. After the highest state court's review of Marty v. Norah, a party can appeal the decision to the United States Supreme Court if​
A) ​if a federal question is involved.
B) ​if a question of state law remains unresolved.
C) ​if Marty questions the result.
D) ​under no circumstances.

Accepted Answer

The United States Supreme Court hears cases that involve federal questions or constitutional issues. If there is no federal question involved, the case cannot be appealed to the Supreme Court.

Quiz 3: Courts and Alternative Dispute Resolution

D'Antoni files a suit in a federal district court against Enya. D'Antoni loses the suit, appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and loses again. D'Antoni asks the United States Supreme Court to hear the case. The Court is​

Carol files a suit against Andy in a state trial court and loses. Carol can​

Kari and Lillian, who are citizens of Mississippi, are involved in a case related to the adoption of their child. Over this case, Mississippi state courts have​

Sforza files a suit against Thieu. If this suit is like most cases, it will be​

Tyler, a citizen of Utah, files a suit in a Utah state court against Virtual Sales Corporation, a Washington state company that does business in Utah. The court has original jurisdiction, which means that​

The Montana Supreme Court rules against Natural Grocery Mart in a case against One Stop 2 Shop Stores, Inc. Natural Grocery files an appeal with the United States Supreme Court. The Court does not hear the case. This​

David, an Alabama resident, files a suit in an Alabama court against QuickAds, an Internet company based in Georgia that provides advertising services. QuickAds only contact with persons in Alabama has been through QuickAds's passive advertising. The Alabama court is​

Stephan wins his suit against Tidewater Boats, Inc. Tidewater's best ground for appeal is the trial court's interpretation of​

Delia files a suit against Eduardo in a Florida state court over the ownership of a boat docked in a Florida harbor. Both Delia and Eduardo are residents of Georgia. Eduardo could ask for a change of venue on the ground that Georgia​

The case of Max v. National Credit Co. is heard in a trial court. The case of O! Boy! Ice Cream Co. v. Pecan Corp. is heard in an appellate court. The difference between a trial and an appellate court is whether​

The Kentucky Supreme Court rules against Luther in a case against Motor Cars, Inc. Luther wants to appeal the case to the United States Supreme Court. Luther must ask the Court to issue a writ of​

Laredo loses his suit against McLain in a North Dakota state trial court. Laredo appeals to a state intermediate court of appeals and loses again. Laredo would appeal next to​

Olivia, a citizen of Nebraska, wants to file a suit against Micah, a citizen of Kansas. Their diversity of citizenship may be a basis for​

Salina files a suit against Tanner. Before going to trial, the parties, with their attorneys, meet to try to resolve their dispute. A third party suggests or proposes a resolution, which the parties may or may not adopt. This is​

All Bikes, Inc., a firm in Wisconsin, advertises on the Web. A court in Ohio would be most likely to exercise jurisdiction over All Bikes if the firm​

Milo files a suit against Nick in an Ohio state court, noting that Nick operates a Web site through which Ohio residents have done substantial business with him. The court is most likely to have jurisdiction over Nick if Milo's claim arises from​

Mediocrité, Inc., makes and sells goods that are substandard. Naomi, who has never bought or used a Mediocrité item, files a suit against the firm, alleging that its products are defective. The company's best ground for dismissal of the suit is that Naomi does not have​

D'Antoni files a suit in a federal district court against Enya. D'Antoni loses the suit, appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and loses again. D'Antoni asks the United States Supreme Court to hear the case. The Court is

Carol files a suit against Andy in a state trial court and loses. Carol can

Kari and Lillian, who are citizens of Mississippi, are involved in a case related to the adoption of their child. Over this case, Mississippi state courts have

Sforza files a suit against Thieu. If this suit is like most cases, it will be

Tyler, a citizen of Utah, files a suit in a Utah state court against Virtual Sales Corporation, a Washington state company that does business in Utah. The court has original jurisdiction, which means that

The Montana Supreme Court rules against Natural Grocery Mart in a case against One Stop 2 Shop Stores, Inc. Natural Grocery files an appeal with the United States Supreme Court. The Court does not hear the case. This

David, an Alabama resident, files a suit in an Alabama court against QuickAds, an Internet company based in Georgia that provides advertising services. QuickAds only contact with persons in Alabama has been through QuickAds's passive advertising. The Alabama court is

Stephan wins his suit against Tidewater Boats, Inc. Tidewater's best ground for appeal is the trial court's interpretation of

Delia files a suit against Eduardo in a Florida state court over the ownership of a boat docked in a Florida harbor. Both Delia and Eduardo are residents of Georgia. Eduardo could ask for a change of venue on the ground that Georgia

The case of Max v. National Credit Co. is heard in a trial court. The case of O! Boy! Ice Cream Co. v. Pecan Corp. is heard in an appellate court. The difference between a trial and an appellate court is whether

The Kentucky Supreme Court rules against Luther in a case against Motor Cars, Inc. Luther wants to appeal the case to the United States Supreme Court. Luther must ask the Court to issue a writ of

Laredo loses his suit against McLain in a North Dakota state trial court. Laredo appeals to a state intermediate court of appeals and loses again. Laredo would appeal next to

Olivia, a citizen of Nebraska, wants to file a suit against Micah, a citizen of Kansas. Their diversity of citizenship may be a basis for

Salina files a suit against Tanner. Before going to trial, the parties, with their attorneys, meet to try to resolve their dispute. A third party suggests or proposes a resolution, which the parties may or may not adopt. This is

All Bikes, Inc., a firm in Wisconsin, advertises on the Web. A court in Ohio would be most likely to exercise jurisdiction over All Bikes if the firm

Milo files a suit against Nick in an Ohio state court, noting that Nick operates a Web site through which Ohio residents have done substantial business with him. The court is most likely to have jurisdiction over Nick if Milo's claim arises from

Mediocrité, Inc., makes and sells goods that are substandard. Naomi, who has never bought or used a Mediocrité item, files a suit against the firm, alleging that its products are defective. The company's best ground for dismissal of the suit is that Naomi does not have