Intro To Law Test 2

Front 1

justiciable

Back 1

when a case is well suited for judicial determination

Front 2

Ripeness

Back 2

focuses on whether a case has developed sufficiently to be before a court for adjudication

Front 3

standing

Back 3

focuses on whether the plaintiff who filed the lawsuit is the right person or entity to be bringing this claim before the court

Front 4

when is a lawsuit unripe

Back 4

if it has been filed prematurely

Front 5

Hollingsworth v. Perry

Back 5

petitioner wanted to marry same sex partner in california. The Court ruled the petitioner lacked standing, which required them to have suffered a concrete and particularized injury.

Front 6

Mootness

Back 6

When cases are outside the judicial power because there is no case or controversy, in that there is no reason to try a case unless there has been some direct adverse effect on some party.

Front 7

When is a case moot

Back 7

when the controversy no longer exists

Front 8

exception to mootness

Back 8

the issue is capable of repetition

Front 9

Jeffrey chiffon vs. lynne chafin

Back 9

custody battle over daughter, judge ruled that child should be returned to UK. Within hours Lynne and child were on the way back to scotland and successfully petitioned in scotland for custody and filed an injunction forbidding jefferey from removing child back to US. The case was dismissed for mootness

Front 10

political question doctrine

Back 10

the judicial branch is not entitled to decide questions that more properly should be decided by the executive and legislative branches of gov.

Front 11

Act-of-state doctrine

Back 11

provides that american courts should not determine the validity of public acts committed by a foreign sovereign within its own territory.

i.e. a dictator seizes merchandise within his country and an american company wants to sue. The court will not rule because of the act-of-state doctrine.

Front 12

What is claim preclusion

Back 12

a final decision by a competent court on a lawsuit's merits concludes the litigation of the parties and constitutes a bar to a new suit

Front 13

what is claim preclusion also known as

Back 13

res judicata

Front 14

Define bar and merger

Back 14

once a claim has been judicially decided, it is finally decided. The only remedy for the loser is to appeal to a higher court.

Front 15

2 conditions for claim preclusion

Back 15

1. identity of the parties must be the same.

2. Identity of claims

Front 16

privity

Back 16

there is a relationship between two people that allow one not directly involved in the case o the take the place of one who is the party

Front 17

When are governments not granted immunity from lawsuits

Back 17

when they perform a function and engage in activities that is usually carried out by private individuals or that it's commercial in character.

Front 18

intefspousal immunity

Back 18

husbands and wives are immune from liability for negligence and intentional torts perpetrated against their spouse

Front 19

Respondent superior

Back 19

permits an injured plaintiff, under certain conditions, to hold a company financially responsible for an employee's negligence and intentional torts

Front 20

regarding Respondent superior, what must a plaintiff prove

Back 20

1. prove that the tortious conduct causing injury was an employee of the company and not a contractor

2. the tortious conduct occurred while the employee was acting within the scope of his or her employment

Front 21

Parental immunity

Back 21

prohibits unemancipated minor children from suing their parents for negligence or intentional torts.

Front 22

Immunity through contract

Back 22

parties agreeing not to sue each other

Front 23

Compensatory Damages

Back 23

compensates the plaintiff for the loss that results form the defendants conduct

Front 24

Rule of mitigation

Back 24

the plaintiff has a duty to minimize damages

Front 25

rule of mitigation explained

Back 25

ex. if A sues B for a something and B could have prevented further damage but chose not to, B will not receive damages for things that could have been prevented

Front 26

Benefit rule

Back 26

If defendant conduct benefits the plaintiff,that amount of damage is subtracted from the recovered damage

Front 27

General damages

Back 27

things you do not have a bill for

i.e. bodily injury, mental anguish

Front 28

special damages

Back 28

you must plead special damages specifically, and these are things you have a bill for

i.e. medical bills, loss of income, etc...

Front 29

Hedonic damages

Back 29

loss of enjoyment of life

Front 30

Mccover v. Dylan

Back 30

Mccover attempted to be sterilized, but she reluctantly had a kid after. She sued for malpractice and the Court gave her everything but for the cost of raising and caring for the child.

Front 31

Nominal Damages

Back 31

awarded when there is a breach of an agreement or an invasion of a right but there is no evidence of any specific harm.

Awarded to vindicate the plaintiff's claim.

Front 32

Why are nominal damages awarded

Back 32

it's the only way a common law court can establish the validity of the plaintiff's claim

Front 33

Punitive or exemplary damages

Back 33

awarded to plaintiff beyond the compensatory amount. These damages are meant to be a substitute to criminal punishment and are used as deterrence for future actions

Front 34

what is an equitable remedy compelling one to do an act

Back 34

mandatory injunction

Front 35

what is an equitable remedy prohibiting an act

Back 35

prohibitory injunction

Front 36

Three classes of injunctions

Back 36

1. permanent

2. preliminary or interlocutory

3. temporary restraining orders

Front 37

What is a permanent injunction

Back 37

a decree issued after a full opportunity to present evidence (after a ruling has been made)

Front 38

What is a preliminary injunction

Back 38

granted as an emergency measure before a full hearing is held. There must be notice to the defendant and a hearing

Front 39

What is a temporary restraining order

Back 39

granted without notice to the defendant. It can only be granted if there is irreparable harm could result and there is no time for notice or a hearing.

Front 40

What is reformation and when is it granted

Back 40

reformation is granted when a written agreement fails to express accurately the parties' agreement because of a mistake, fraud, or the drafter's ambiguous language

Front 41

purpose of reformation

Back 41

rectify or reform a written instrument in order that it may express the real agreement or intention of the parties

Front 42

When is rescission granted

Back 42

when one of the parties consents to a contract because of duress, under influence, fraud, or innocent misrepresentation, or when either or both of the parties made a mistake concerning the contract.

The court cancels the agreement

Front 43

Define unconsciousable

Back 43

if a contract clause is too unfair or one-sided

Front 44

Specific performance

Back 44

equitable remedy that is identified with breached of contract. Only granted where there is a valid contract. Usually involves land or unique items

Front 45

Laches

Back 45

an equitable defense that is used to deny equitable relief where a plaintiff's unreasonable delay in bringing action has caused prejudicial harm o the defendant

Front 46

Declaratory Judgement

Back 46

a judicial determination of the rights and obligations of the parties

Front 47

Mala in se crimes

Back 47

offenses that are intrinsically bad such as murder, rape, arson

Front 48

Mala prohibita

Back 48

acts that are criminal only because the law defines them as criminal

Front 49

Basic components of criminal offenses

Back 49

1. wrongful act

2. the guilty mind

3. the concurrence of act and intent

4. causation

Front 50

actus reus

Back 50

the wrongful act

ex) larceny includes the wrongful act of unlawfully taking and carrying away of another person's property

Front 51

mens rea

Back 51

criminal state of mind

Front 52

two major aproaches to mens rea

Back 52

traditional common law and Model penal code

Front 53

Three categories of intent under the common law approach

Back 53

general intent, specific intent, and criminal negligence

Front 54

general intent crimes

Back 54

for conviction the prosecutor has to prove that the accused intended to commit the actus reus

Front 55

specific intent crime

Back 55

requires proof of the commission of an actus reus, plus a specified knowledge or an additional intent, such as the intent to commit a felony

Front 56

criminal negligence

Back 56

results from unconscious risk creation

Front 57

strict liability offenses

Back 57

no concurrence between the criminal act and the intent, the offender possesses a generalized threat to society at large

Front 58

example of strict liability offense

Back 58

speeding drivers, liquor store owner who sells alcohol to minors

Front 59

inchoate crimes

Back 59

criminal prepatory activities

Front 60

vicarious liability

Back 60

indiv and groups are held criminally liable for actions committed by other people

1.business owners and corporations

Front 61

Defenses that can be raised in criminal prosectution

Back 61

1.alibi defense

2. good character defense

3. justification defense

4. affirmative defense ) excuse defense

Front 62

justification defenses

Back 62

self-defense, defense of others, defense of property, necessity-choice-of-evils and duress coercion

Front 63

Affirmative defense/excuse defenses

Back 63

duress, insanity, and involuntary intoxication

Front 64

M'Naghten Rule

Back 64

a defendant is not guilty if he had a diseased mind at the time of the act and was unable to distinguish right from wrong and was unaware of the nature and quality of his act due to a diseased mind

Front 65

irresistible impulse test

Back 65

specifies that a defendant is not guilty if he knows that an act is wrong and is aware of the nature and quality of the act, but cannot refrain from committing the act