Dynamic business law 4e kubasek 4e CH03

Chapter 3
The U.S. Legal System

Copyright © 2017 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGrawHill Education.


Overview
• LO3-1: What are the different types of
jurisdiction a court must have before it can
render a binding decision in a case?
• LO3-2: What is venue?
• LO3-3: How is our dual court system structured?
• LO3-4: What are the threshold requirements that
must be met before a court will hear a case?
• LO3-5: What are the steps in civil litigation?
3-2


Chapter 3 Hypothetical Case 1
• Sara Burns cares deeply for her best friend Allison Lefevers, even though she does not
care for her timidity. Last month, Lefevers's co-worker, Thomas Benfield, informed
their supervisor that Lefevers had wrongfully taken hundreds of dollars from the
company's operational account for her own personal use. After an extensive
investigation, the company concluded that Benfield's allegations were baseless,
originating from ill will between the two co-workers. The company allowed Lefevers to
keep her job, and terminated Benfield for his wrongful conduct.
Burns has encouraged Lefevers to pursue a civil action against Benfield for defamation
(even though he lost his job, Burns has determined that he is far from "judgmentproof"), but Lefevers has politely declined, saying that she does not want to "fight the
fight." Frustrated with her friend's lack of fortitude, Burns plans to file a civil action on
behalf of Lefevers, listing her friend as the plaintiff, and Thomas Benfield as the
defendant. Should she recover a judgment in favor of her friend, and should execution

on the judgment be successful, Burns will turn any proceeds over to Lefevers.
• Can Sara Burns proceed in a civil action against Thomas Benfield on behalf of her
friend Allison Lefevers? Why or why not?

3-3


Chapter 3 Hypothetical Case 2
• Officer Brian Perkins was having a difficult Monday morning. For the past three hours, he
was responsible for serving process in three civil cases (As Chapter 3 indicates, service of
process is the procedure by which courts present litigation documents to defendants. Those
documents typically consist of a complaint, which specifies the factual and legal basis for
the lawsuit and the relief the plaintiff seeks, and a summons, a court order that notifies the
defendant of the lawsuit and explains how and when to respond to the complaint.) For the
first civil case, Merriwether v. Alstot, Officer Perkins attempted to serve the defendant
Harry Alstott at his home, but no one appeared to be there. For the second civil case, Setliff
v. Sanders, the person answering the door claimed the defendant, Marshall Sanders, did
not live there, and that he did not even know who Marshall Sanders was. Leaving the
premises, Officer Perkins surmised that the residential address indicated on the summons
was incorrect. Either that, or the person who answered the door was lying.
For his third attempt at service of process that morning, in a lawsuit captioned Jackson v.
Graves, Officer Perkins drove to the home of Laticia M. Graves at 721 Magnolia Street.
Officer Perkins knocked on the door of the dilapidated house, and although no one
answered the door, a second-story window opened almost immediately. A female in the
house looked down from her second story vantage point and pointedly asked Officer
Perkins, "What do you want?" Officer Perkins responded with a question, "Are you Laticia
Graves?," to which the woman responded, "Yeah. What's it to you?"

3-4

Chapter 3 Hypothetical Case 2
(cont'd)
• Officer Perkins asked the not-so-polite occupant to open the door, to which she
responded, "I ain't comin' down there, and if you ain't got a warrant, you ain't
comin' in." Frustrated, Officer Perkins replied, "Well, I have civil papers to serve
you, ma'am, and if you won't come down to get them, I'm going to put them in
your mailbox." The response was, "I ain't comin' to the door."
Officer Perkins immediately proceeded to the mailbox, and put the complaint
and summons in the matter of Jackson v. Graves in the box. The address on the
mailbox indicated 721 Magnolia Street. In his notes, Officer Graves wrote that
the defendant, Laticia Graves, had been served with process on Monday,
September 13, 2015 at 11:47 a.m. As he entered his patrol car, Officer Perkins
looked backed at the second-story window from which he had received his
impolite greeting. The woman had since closed the window, and was watching
his every move.
• Did Officer Perkins effectively serve process on the defendant, Laticia Graves?
Why or why not?

3-5


Types of Jurisdiction
• Original jurisdiction:
The power to hear
and decide cases
when they first enter
the legal system

• Appellate jurisdiction:

The power to review
previous judicial
decisions to
determine whether
trial courts erred in
their decisions

3-6


Types of Jurisdiction
• In personam
jurisdiction: The
power to render a
decision affecting the
rights of the specific
persons before the
court

• Subject-matter
jurisdiction: The
power to hear
certain kinds of cases

3-7


Subject-Matter Jurisdiction:
Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction
• Admiralty cases

• Bankruptcy cases
• Federal criminal prosecutions
• Cases in which one state sues another state
• Claims against the United States
• Federal patent, trademark, and copyright claims
• Other claims involving federal statutes that
specify exclusive federal jurisdiction
3-8


Subject-Matter Jurisdiction: State
Jurisdiction
• All cases not falling under exclusive federal jurisdiction

3-9


Subject-Matter Jurisdiction:
Concurrent Federal Jurisdiction
• Federal-question cases
• Diversity-of-citizenship cases

3-10


What Is Venue?
• Venue: The court's geographic location,
determined by each state's statutes
• Change of venue
• When the court location where plaintiff

files case is inconvenient to defendant
• If defendant believes it will be difficult to
select an unbiased jury in present court
location
3-11


The U.S. Dual Court System
• Dual, parallel court structure
• Federal
• State

3-12


The Federal Court System
• Federal trial courts (U.S. district courts)
• Intermediate courts of appeal
• United States Supreme Court

3-13


State Court Systems
• State trial courts
• Intermediate courts of appeal
• Courts of last resort

3-14

Threshold Requirements for
Litigation
• Standing (to sue)
• Case or controversy (justiciable
controversy)
• Ripeness

3-15


Steps in Civil Litigation:
The Pretrial Stage
• Informal negotiations
• Pleadings
• Service of process
• Defendant's response
• Pretrial motions
• Discovery
• Pretrial conference
3-16


Steps in Civil Litigation:
The Trial
• Jury selection
• Opening statements
• Examination of witnesses and presentation
of evidence
• Closing arguments

• Jury instructions
3-17


Steps in Civil Litigation:
Posttrial Motions
• Motion for a judgment in accordance with
verdict
• Motion for a judgment notwithstanding
verdict
• Motion for a new trial

3-18


Steps in Civil Litigation:
Appellate Procedure
• Either party or both parties may appeal a
judge's decision
• Requires a prejudicial error of law
• Must file notice of appeal
• Appellant must file a brief
• Oral arguments
• Decision
3-19


Appellate Court Decision-Making
Powers
• Affirmation

• Modification
• Reversal
• Remand

3-20


Chapter 3 Hypothetical Case 3
• The mayor of Forbes, Mississippi was given video evidence that Brenda
Hollingsworth, the town's fire chief, was taking bribes from a company that
boards up fire-damaged buildings in return for letting them know first when a
fire occurs. The mayor demanded her resignation, telling her she would be fired
if she did not resign, and drew up an agreement that served as her resignation
and also granted her a $4,000 severance package. Hollingsworth signed the
agreement and accepted the severance package, but then immediately filed a
lawsuit in the state court system on the grounds of wrongful discharge and
defamation, as the mayor told other members of the town government why
Hollingsworth resigned. The county court reviewed the suit and dismissed it.
Hollingsworth appeals the county court's decision to the state appeals court. The
appeals court reviews the information in the case.
• Do you believe that Hollingsworth's appeal is groundless? Or will the appeals
court hear the case? What is the significance of the facts that she signed the
agreement and accepted the severance package, and that the mayor told others
about Hollingsworth's transgressions?

3-21


Chapter 3 Hypothetical Case 4
• Defendant John Woodson is an African-American male accused of murdering a white

female in an apartment burglary. During the jury selection process, Prosecutor Wallace
Forbes exercises only two peremptory challenges, excusing from service the only two
African Americans in the jury. An all-white jury is eventually empanelled, and Defendant
Woodson is convicted of first-degree murder, with life imprisonment imposed as
punishment.
After the jury verdict is announced, Prosecutor Forbes is questioned by the local media
concerning his exercise of the peremptory challenges. Prosecutor Forbes explains that
race was not a factor in his decision, but that the two potential jurors were excused
"because they have facial hair, and as a matter of practice, I do not want individuals with
facial hair serving on my jury." Further, Prosecutor Forbes states, "I categorically deny
that race played any factor whatsoever in the jury selection process."
• On appeal, should the appellate court: 1) deem Prosecutor Forbes's actions reversible
error, and remand the case to the trial court level to be retried; 2) vacate (nullify) the
jury verdict, and dismiss the charges against Defendant Woodson; or
3) allow the conviction to stand? Should prosecutors be allowed to consider race, gender,
and age as factors in the jury selection process?

3-22