By: admin
Discovery
The scope of discovery as defined in FRCP 26(b) states that a party may discover any item relevant to a claim ore defense WHEN it is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of “admissible” evidence. (in contrast to the older rule which required relevancy to the “subject matter” of the case). Items available in discovery are any tangible or intangible item that is not privileged for example: trade secrets, attorney work product, client confidentiality, and medical records (exceptions for substantial need or situations where the information is impossible to obtain otherwise). You have 30 days to respond to a discovery request and if the information that you provide is insufficient the counter-party will have 30 days to file a motion to compel. All items you wish to withhold from discovery will require a privilege log and justifiable reason why ...
By: admin
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
GEORGE W. BUSH, et al., PETITIONERS v.
ALBERT GORE, Jr., et al.
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT
[December 12, 2000]
I
On December 8, 2000, the Supreme Court of Florida ordered that the Circuit Court of Leon County tabulate by hand 9,000 ballots in Miami-Dade County. It also ordered the inclusion in the certified vote totals of 215 votes identified in Palm Beach County and 168 votes identified in Miami-Dade County for Vice President Albert Gore, Jr., and Senator Joseph Lieberman, Democratic Candidates for President and Vice President. The Supreme Court noted that petitioner, Governor George W. Bush asserted that the net gain for Vice President Gore in Palm Beach County was 176 votes, and directed the Circuit Court to resolve that dispute on remand. ___ So. 2d, at ___ (slip op., at 4, n. 6). ...
By: admin
Take a time out from the books and get your chuckle on, hilarious law school funny videos are guaranteed to crack you up in the library. Tell us which one is your favorite ar post your favorite funny lawschool video if you dont see it in the list, keep checking back as the list will keep growing.
Demetri Martin on Law School
When Jurisdiction Gets Personal
F*** You Unpaid Internship
Law School State of Mind
Notorious FRCP
Barbri Girl, Barbi World
So You Want to Go To Law School?
By: admin
Follow the flow chart to establish or deny personal jurisdiction:
By: admin
UCC or
Restatement?
UCC:
Address was this person a merchant, was
the offer a firm offer, Applies
in the sale of moveable goods, (Probably not for leases or
Definitely not services provided)
Restatement:
Applies in some jurisdictions when not a sale of goods, (UCC only
persuasive when changing the law under the restatement
RARE Caseci v. Canio Constr. Group new
default house warranty).
WAS THERE A K?
OFFER
The
WAS[N'T] an offer because. I subjectively
thought the counter-party was offering, and an ORP would
objectively
believe an offer was being made. Embry
v McKittrick Were
the terms specific, and did the parties intend to be bound? (Look
a Who wants to enforce)
REST §24. OFFER
DEFINED
An offer is the
manifestation of willingness to enter into a bargain, so made as
to justify another person in understanding that his assent to
that bargain is invited and will conclude it.
§24 GIFT not an Offer
(b) A proposal ...
By: admin
Contracts Generally
When analyzing contractual issues you must first examine whether the contract is covered under the Uniform Commercial Code or the Restatement Second of Contracts. The UCC will cover any sale of moveable goods which includes commodities like rice, alcohol, cars, etc. but does not apply to the sale of land, services, stocks, etc. If covered by the UCC ask if the either party was a merchant, determine if it was a firm offer, if the goods meet the “perfect tender rule” etc. The Restatement will apply in most other jurisdictions and covers other types of sales when not dealing with goods or merchants. The Restatement will cover, for example, the sale of a business or securities, the sale of land, or services like rentals (car, boat, etc.). The UCC is meant to protect both consumers and merchants when making ...
By: admin
State Rubbish Collectors Assoc v. Siliznoff
1952
Supp pg 20
Facts
Siliznoff was given the Brewery trash account which his father inlaw Kobzeff previously shared with Abromoff
Siliznoff took the account
The Rubbish Assoc went after Sliznoff becuase the Assoc wont let one take an account from another
Rubbish Assoc threatend to burn his truck if he didnt pay $1850 to Abromoff through the Assoc
Sliznoff doesnt pay
Procedural History
Rubbish sues for breach
Sliznoff counter claims Assault but will loose due to not imminent threats, only future threats.
Holding
Traynor belives the threat of assault should include threats in the future but calls it intentional infliction of emotional distress
- From their own emotions jurors are aware of the extent and character of the disagreeable emotions that may result from the defendants conduct, but a difficult medical question is presented when it must be determined if emotional distress resulted in physical injury.
intentional infliction ...
