Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
The discovery includes: depositions, answers to written interrogatories, production of documents and evidence, court-ordered examinations, and requests for admissions (Mann, R. & Roberts, B. 2009. p.53). The final step of the pretrial procedure is the pretrial conference between judge and the parties' attorneys which serves to "simplify the issues in dispute and encourage settlement of the dispute without trial" (Mann, R. & Roberts, B. 2009. p.53). Directly before a trial though either party may ask the court for a summary judgment which allows the judge to decide the case on matters of law without a jury trial.
If the trial phase has been reached then no settlement or summary judgment was present. The trial begins with jury selection which includes the voir dire (an examination of potential jurors. With a jury selected the trial begins with opening statements by the attorneys, the prosecutor's presentation of the case including direct examination questions of witnesses, and the defense cross examination. During the trial the judge will rule on matters of law which may be later used by attorneys for an appeal. At the close of the prosecution's case the defendant may present a case or ask for a directed verdict which allows the judge to decide on the case's merits without a jury....
If no such request is made the case proceeds to closing arguments, jury instruction and deliberation, and ultimately the announcement of the verdict. A verdict may result in motions by the losing party for a new trial or a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. In absence of these motions the losing party may file an appeal which would be heard by a higher court (Mann, R. & Roberts, B. 2009. p.53). With this context in mind the examination of Trucker's case may begin.
Jurisdiction over the Suit
The first question to be determined is what court will hear the case? This question is answered through jurisdiction. "Jurisdiction means the power and authority of a court to hear and decide a given case" (Mann, R. & Roberts, B. 2009. p. 46). A court must have both subject matter jurisdiction and jurisdiction over the parties. In the Trucker case the analysis begins determinant of federal jurisdiction. Could a federal district court in Confusion hear the case? Not on the basis of exclusive federal jurisdiction which allows a federal court to hear disputes regarding: admiralty, bankruptcy, antitrust, patent, trademark, copyright cases, suits against the U.S., and cases arising under federal statute" (Mann, R. & Roberts, B. 2009. p.46). However, the federal district court
If the trial phase has been reached then no settlement or summary judgment was present. The trial begins with jury selection which includes the voir dire (an examination of potential jurors. With a jury selected the trial begins with opening statements by the attorneys, the prosecutor's presentation of the case including direct examination questions of witnesses, and the defense cross examination. During the trial the judge will rule on matters of law which may be later used by attorneys for an appeal. At the close of the prosecution's case the defendant may present a case or ask for a directed verdict which allows the judge to decide on the case's merits without a jury. If no such request is made the case proceeds to closing arguments, jury instruction and deliberation, and ultimately the announcement of the verdict. A verdict may result in motions by the losing party for a new trial or a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. In absence of these motions the losing party may file an appeal which would be heard by a higher court (Mann, R. & Roberts, B. 2009. p.53). With this context in mind the examination of Trucker's case may begin.
Jurisdiction over the Suit
The first question to be determined is what court will hear the case? This question is answered through jurisdiction. "Jurisdiction means the power and authority of a court to hear and decide a given case" (Mann, R. & Roberts, B. 2009. p. 46). A court must have both subject matter jurisdiction and jurisdiction over the parties. In the Trucker case the analysis begins determinant of federal jurisdiction. Could a federal district court in Confusion hear the case? Not on the basis of exclusive federal jurisdiction which allows a federal court to hear disputes regarding: admiralty, bankruptcy, antitrust, patent, trademark, copyright cases, suits against the U.S., and cases arising under federal statute" (Mann, R. & Roberts, B. 2009. p.46). However, the federal district court
Tanya Trucker and Confusion Tanya Trucker and the State of Confusion In the State of Confusion, trucks that travel through must use a B-type hitch on all trucks and towing trailers, however, Tanya Trucker, who lives in another state, Denial, but must have her trucks travel through Confusion, does not like the added expense the B-type hitch law requires. She wants to take the State of Confusion to court and challenge the
Confusion Hypothetical: Can the State Enact a Statute Requiring a Specific Tow Hitch? Facts: Tanya Trucker is a trucking company owner who resides in and/or operates her business in the state of Denial. Her trucking business operates in the state of Confusion as well as other states. The state of Confusion enacted a statute requiring all trucks and towing trailers that use its highways to use a B-type truck hitch,
Confusion: Trailer Hitches Facts: The state of Confusion enacted a statute requiring all trucks and towing trailers that use its highways to use a B-type truck hitch, which is manufactured by only one manufacturer in confusion. As a result, truckers either have to avoid Confusion or have the hitch installed. The federal government has not attempted to regulate truck hitches on the nation's highways. Tanya Trucker, a trucking company owner
Although here, there are not any federal statutes in place regarding truck hitches, the Supreme Court has consistently held that the language of the Commerce Clause contains a further, negative command prohibiting certain state regulation even when Congress has failed to legislate on the subject. This is evident in Quill Corp v. North Dakota [504 U.S. 298 (1992)] in which the Supreme Court determined that a tax levied on
However, where a state statute exerts control over matters capable of being regulated by Congress under the Commerce Clause, those statutes are invalid because they conflict with a concept that is generally referred to as the "dormant Commerce Clause" (Dershowitz, 2002; Friedman, 2005). In modern application, federal courts apply a three-pronged test to determine whether or not a given state statute is invalid by virtue of a conflict with Congressional
Business Law The federal district court for the district in which the State of Confusion resides will have jurisdiction over the constitutionality of the B-Hitch Statute. The lawsuit by Tanya Trucker will be heard in federal court because the federal courts have jurisdiction over issues of federal questions. This suit concerns a matter for the federal courts because the issue is "whether a state statute which interferes with commerce in the