Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/39

Click to flip

39 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
A asks B to paint black trim on his car, and B paints it all black. What to sue for?
Trespass to chattels
Federal government building pollutes in excess of state pollution standards.
Supremacy clause prohibits state from imposing its regulations on the federal government.

But state may constitutionally exceed federal environmental standards
Implied-in-fact contract
Manifestations of assent other than oral or written language.

A person knowingly accepts offered benefits

Fact pattern: mistakenly performs services (e.g. replaces the wrong roof) while the party sits and watches
Basis for suing because someone distributed someone's products along with yours
Arguing that custom in the trade is only to distribute one manufacturer's product
A becomes enraged and hits B in the face twice, B pulls out a gun and shoots A. A can be charged with
Voluntary manslaughter, b/c B committed serious battery on A, which is sufficient provocation
Federal law requiring that all automobiles driven on U.S. military bases be equipped with air bags would most likely be justified by
Property Clause: the power to make all "needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the U.S."
What sort of loyalty oath is permissible to require of a government employee?
The employee may be required to affirm that she will oppose the violent overthrow of state or federal governments.

Must not be overbroad or vague.
D is fired from his sales job while calling on customers in another city and fails to return the company car he used for his sales visits. What crime?
Embezzlement
Don takes Vic's car without permission, intending to return it the next day, but after using it for awhile, Don decides to keep it.
Larceny (continuing trespass doctrine). Because Don took the car with a wrongful state of mind, the trespassory taking "continued" until he formed the intent to commit larceny.
After having her car repaired at the local automotive shop, Debbie takes a spare key and drives away with the car without paying the repair bill because she thinks the shop charged her too much. What crime?
Possibly larceny; even though Debbie has title to her car, the repair shop has a superior claim to possession b/c it has a mechanic's lien that entitles it to keep the car until the repairs are paid for.
Donna rents a car from a rental agency using a phony driver's license, intending not to return it, and sells it to a used car dealer for cash.
Larceny by trick; rental agency's consent was induced by misrepresentation.
Conditions precedent and the Parol Evidence rule
Evidence is admissible to show a condition precedent; the Parol Evidence rule does not apply b/c the existence of a condition precedent because it does not contradict the terms of the agreement; it simply says that the written contract would not become effective until the condition occurred.
Traditional public forums
Streets, sidewalks, public parks

NOT a courthouse or its grounds
Nude dancing and the First amendment
Erotica is "marginally protected" speech and can be regulated to serve important, rather than compelling, interests, such as protecting community morals and property values.

A town may revise its zoning ordinance to limit the location of adult theaters and nude dancing establishments to control the secondary effects of such businesses.
Modifications without additional consideration under Article 2
Acceptable, but require good faith in performance or enforcement; a "modification" without legitimate commercial reason is ineffective as a violation of good faith.
Factors determining whether something is a nuisance
Nuisance is substantial, unreasonable interference with another's use and enjoyment of property.

Conduct consistent with a zoning ordinance permit is highly persuasive evidence that the use is not a nuisance.

Coming to the nuisance is not a good defense.
Excuse of the occurrence of a condition precedent
Where the party having the benefit of the condition indicates by words or conduct that he will not insist upon it; if party indicates he is waiving a condition before it happens, and the person addressed detrimentally relies on it, this is binding estoppel.
Rejection in option contracts
Rejection of offer in option contract does not terminate the power to accept the offer. If the optionor detrimentally relies on the rejection, the power to accept the offer terminates at the time of reliance.
Test-taking tip: breach versus duty in negligence cases
if you can show no duty there is no need to reach the breach part of it, so look for that first. I've screwed this up in different ways on different questions. Duty is less squishy so easier to test on multiple choice!
Suspension or revocation of a business license. What constitutional problem?
Procedural due process. Business license is a valid property right, and procedural due process requires a hearing if it is suspended.
Permissible scope of incitement statutes
Cannot prohibit advocating the use of force or of violation of the law unless such advocacy (i) is directed to producing or inciting imminent lawless action; and (ii) is likely to produce or incite such action.
Option contracts and acceptance
Mailbox rule does not apply, beeatch
Unilateral mistake and misrepresentation as ways to get out of a contract
Unilateral mistake you only have to prove that the other party should have known there was a mistake; misrepresentation you have to prove actual knowledge of one (essentially)
Invitation for offers, or offer?
The broader the communicating media, e.g. publication, the more likely it is that the courts will view the communication as merely solicitation of an offer.
Intergovernmental immunity
State and local governments cannot tax or regulate the activities of the federal government
What constitutes material alteration of contract for 2-207 purposes?
"an alteration is material if it changes either party's risks or remedies."
Larceny and burglary; double jeopardy problem?
Not on MBE. Larceny requires asportation, and burglary requires breaking/entering.
Traditional contributory negligence defenses, exceptions
No defense to intentional torts or wanton and willful misconduct.

P may recover if D had the last clear chance to avoid the accident - D was able, but failed, to avoid harming P at the time of the accident.

NY is comparative negligence state
What should P do if she is not sure whom to sue?
Res ipsa loquitur is available in a case where a particular D had the power of control over the site of the injury.
Standard for speech regulations: public forum
to be valid, must be
-content neutral
-narrowly tailored to serve significant govt interest
-leave open alternative channels of communication
Standards for speech regulation - nonpublic forum
Valid if
-viewpoint neutral
-reasonably related to legitimate governmental interest
Conflict between treaty and legislation by Congress
Last in time controls; Congress may repeal a treaty
Inchoate crimes which merge into underlying offense
Solicitation and attempt
NOT conspiracy
Intent to permanently deprive
If at the time of the taking D intended to deal with the possesion in a manner that involves substantial risk of loss, this suffices as intent to permanently deprive
Death of co-felon during commission of felony
Majority: not liable for felony murder
Reasonable expectation of privacy on probation
Fourth Amendment is not violated by a statute authorizing warrantless searches of probationer's home when there are reasonable grounds to believe contraband is present
Two persons tried together, the confession of one implicates the other. Circumstances where it can be admitted:
all portions of the statement referring to the other D have been eliminated; confessing D takes the stand and subjects himself to cross-examination with respect to truth or falsity; and confession of nontestifying co-defendant is being used to rebut D's claim that his confession was obtained coerciely, in which case jury must be instruced as to purpose of admission
Victim's motive to provoke in use of deadly force cases
Irrelevant!
Common law conspiracy (unilateral?)
must be two guilty parties