Ch 2 The Court System

Front 1

judicial review

Back 1

enables the judicial branch to act as a check on the other two branches of government, in line with the system of checks and balances established by the US constitution.

Front 2

jurisdiction

Back 2

the authority of a court to hear and decide a specific action.

Front 3

in personam jurisdiction

Back 3

(personal jurisdiction)- court jurisdiction over the person involved in a legal action.

Front 4

in rem jurisdiction

Back 4

court's jurisdiction over the a defendant's property

Front 5

long arm statute

Back 5

court can exercise personal jurisdiction over certain out-of-state defendants based on the activities that took place within the state.

Front 6

minimum contacts

Back 6

a requirementthat means that the defendant must have had sufficient connection to the state for the judge to conclude that it is fair for the state to exercise power over the defendant.

Front 7

subject matter jurisdiction

Back 7

refers to the limitations on the types of cases a court can hear. Certain courts are empowered to hear certain kinds of disputes.

Front 8

general jurisdiction

Back 8

can decide cases involving a broad array of issues. i.e. is state trial court or a federal district court.

Front 9

limited jurisdiction

Back 9

courts that handle very specific types of cases

Front 10

probate courts

Back 10

are state courts that handle only the disposition of a person's assets and obligations after the that person's death, including issues relating to the custody and guardinship of children.

Front 11

bankruptcy courts

Back 11

handle only bankruptcy proceedings which are governed by federal bankruptcy law.

Front 12

district courts

Back 12

are the federal system's version of trial courts

Front 13

federal question

Back 13

a question that pertains to the US constitution, acts of Congress, or treaties. A federal question provides a basis for federal jurisdiction.

Front 14

diversity of citizenship

Back 14

Under Article III, Section 2, of the constitution, a basis for federal court jurisdiction over a lawsuit between 1) citizens of different states, 2)a foreign country and citizens of a states of different states, or 3) citizens of a state and citizens or subjects of a different country. The amount in controversy must be more than $75,000 before a federal court can take jurisdiction in such cases.

Front 15

exclusive jurisdiction

Back 15

when cases can be tried only in federal courts or only in state courts, exclusive jurisdiction exists.

Front 16

concurrent jurisdiction

Back 16

when both federal and state courts have the power to hear a case, as is true, as is true in diversity of citizenship.

Front 17

venue

Back 17

concerned with the most appopriate location for a trial.

Front 18

standing to sue

Back 18

sufficient stake in the matter to justify seeking relief through the court system. Standing can be broken down into three elements.

1) Harm- The party bringing the action must have suffered or woll immminently suffer harm- an invasion of a legally protected interest. THe controversy must be real and substantial rather than hipothetical

2) Causation- THere must be a causal connection between the conduct complained of and the injury.

3) Remedy- It must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a favorable court decision will remedy, or make up, the injury suffered.

Front 19

small claims court

Back 19

inferior trial courts that hear only civil cases involving claims of less than a certain amount such as $5000, amount can vary from state to state.

Front 20

question of fact

Back 20

deals with what really happened in regard to the dispute beong tried, such as whether a party actually burned a flag.

Front 21

question of law

Back 21

concerns the application or interpetration of the law, such as whether flag burning is a form of speech protected by the US Constitution. Only a judge not a jury can rule in a question of law.

Front 22

writ of certiorari

Back 22

a writ from a higher court asking the lower court for the record of the case.

Front 23

rule of four

Back 23

approval of four US supreme court justices to issue a writ to a lower court.

Front 24

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Back 24

The rules controlling procedural matters in civil trials brought before the federal district courts.

Front 25

pleadings

Back 25

inform each party of the other's claims and specify the issues involved in the case.

Front 26

complaint

Back 26

the pleading made by a plaintiff alleging wrongdoing on the part of the defendant; the document that, when filed with a court, initiate \s a lawsuit.

Front 27

service of process

Back 27

formally notifying the defendant of a lawsuit

Front 28

summons

Back 28

a notice requring the defendant to appear in court and answer the complaint.

Front 29

default judgement

Back 29

a judgement entered by a court agaisnt a defendant who has failed to appear in court to answer or defend against the plaintiff's claim.

Front 30

response

Back 30

defendant's reponse to a complaint

Front 31

affirmative defense

Back 31

a response to a plaintiff's claim that does not deny the plaintiff's facts but attacks the plaintiff's legal right to bring an action.

Front 32

counterclaim

Back 32

a claim made by a defendant in a civil lawsuit that in effect sues the plainfiff

Front 33

motion

Back 33

a procedural request or application presented by an attorney to the court on behalf of a client .

Front 34

pretrial motions

Back 34

a written or oral application to a court for a ruling or order, made before trial.

Front 35

motion to dismiss

Back 35

asking the court to dismiss the case for the reasons stated in the motion. Normally it is the defendant that pleads this motion.

Front 36

motion for judgement on the pleadings

Back 36

asks the court to decide the issue solely on the pleadings without proceeding the trial. The judge will grant the motiom only when there is no dispute over the facts of the case and the sole issue to be resolved is a question of law.

Front 37

motion for summary judgement

Back 37

a motion requesting the court to enter a judgement without proceeding the trial. The motion can be based on evidence outside the pleadings and will be granted only if no facts are in dispute.

Front 38

affidavit

Back 38

a written or printed voluntary statement of facts, confirmed by the oath or affirmation of the party making it and made before a personm having the authority to administer the oath of affirmation.

Front 39

discovery

Back 39

the process of obtaining information from the opposing party or whom witnesses prior to trial

Front 40

deposition

Back 40

is sworn testimony by a party to the lawsuit or by any witness, recorded by an authorized court official.

Front 41

impeach

Back 41

to challenge the credibility of a person's testimony or attempt to discredit a party or witness. Somtimes with the use of previously recorded depositions.

Front 42

interrogatories

Back 42

written questions for which written answers are prepared and then signed under oath. Main difference between written depositions and interrogatories is that the latter are intended for the parties of the lawsuit and not a witness.

Front 43

e-evidence

Back 43

electronic evidence consists of all computer generated or electronically recorded information.

Front 44

metadata

Back 44

data that are automatically recorded by electronic devices and provide information about who created a file and when, and who accesed, modified, or transmitted it on their hard drives. Can be described as data about data.

Front 45

pretrial conference

Back 45

a conference, scheduled before trial begins, between the judge and the attorneys litigating the suit. The parties may settle the dispute, clarify the issues, schedule discovery, and so on during the conference.

Front 46

voir dire

Back 46

the jury selection process in which the both attorney's select the jurors.

Front 47

opening statements

Back 47

a statement made to the jury at the beginning of a trial by a party's attorney, prior to the presentation of evidence. The attorney briefly outlines the evidence that will be offered and the legal authority that will be pursued.

Front 48

rules of evidence

Back 48

series of rules that the courts have created to ensure that any evidence presented during a trial is fair and reliable.

Front 49

relevant evidence

Back 49

is evidence that tends to prove or disprove a fact in question or to establish the degree of profotability of a fact or action.

Front 50

hearsay

Back 50

is testimony someone gives on court about a statement made by someone else who was not under oath at the time of the statement.

Front 51

direct examination

Back 51

the examination of a witness by the attorney who calls the witness to the stand to testify on behalf of the attorney's client.

Front 52

cross examination

Back 52

the questioning of an opposing witness during a trial.

Front 53

motion for a judgement a matter of law

Back 53

In a federal court, a party's request that the judge enter a judgement in her or his favor before the case is submitted to a jury because the other party has not presented sufficient evidence to support the claim . The state courts refer to this request as a motion for a directed verdict.

Front 54

rebuttal

Back 54

the refutation of evidence introduced by an adverse party's attorney.

Front 55

rejoinder

Back 55

the defendant's answer to the plaintiff's rebuttal.

Front 56

closing arguments

Back 56

attorney's summarize the facts and evidence presented during the trial and indicates why the facts and evidence support his or her client's claim.

Front 57

verdict

Back 57

a formal decision made by a jury

Front 58

motion for a new trial

Back 58

losing party may make a motion to set aside the adverse verdict and any judgement and to hold a new trial. Usually is granted when the judge feels there has been a serious mistake on the jury's side.

Front 59

motion for judgement n.o.v.

Back 59

a motion requesting the court to grant judgement in favor of the party making the motion on the ground that the jury verdict against him or her was unreasonable and erroneous.

Front 60

brief

Back 60

formal legal document outlining the facts and issues of the case, the judges rulings or jury's findings that should be reversed or modified, the applicable law, and argumet's on petitioner's side.

Front 61

writ of execution

Back 61

an order of directing the sheriff to seize and sell the defendant's nonexempts assets, or property,