Exam 3: Judgement

The following facts were established during a hearing in a criminal case: - John was arrested for robbery of a convenience store. - Immediately upon arrest John was advised of his Miranda rights-the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney. - John was booked into the county jail. - John was charged at an arraignment held the day after his arrest. - After a bail hearing, John was released on $30,000 bail. - An undercover police officer, wearing a "wire," met John at a bar. - The officer deliberately began talking about robberies in town. - During the conversation John admitted that he robbed the convenience store. - The prosecutor wants to use the tape recording of John's "confession" at trial. Under the Sixth Amendment, a defendant's statement is not admissible if (1) the defendant has been charged or indicted, (2) the police "deliberately elicited" an incriminating statement, (3) the statement was related to the charge or indictment, and (4) the defendant's counsel was not present when the statement was elicited. If John later claimed the statement at the bar violated his Sixth Amendment rights, what other fact or facts must John prove?

The jury concluded that the driver of the brown car ran a red light at the intersection of Maple Drive and First Street while proceeding south on Maple Drive. Joan testified that she was driving her blue Toyota and headed west on First Street. She further testified that, as she approached Maple Drive, the light was green and that, as she proceeded through the intersection, a brown car collided with her Toyota. The jury accepted Joan's testimony and concluded that the driver of the brown car negligently caused the collision. Evidence shows that Bob is the owner of the brown car. Based on these facts alone, was Bob negligent?

Under Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, an offer of judgment must be served at least fourteen days before the date set for trial. Jerry's personal injury suit against George was set for trial on June 25. George served an offer of judgment on June 7 for $25,000 plus costs. Jerry does not accept the offer of judgment, and after trial, Jerry obtains a judgment of $20,000. George then claims that Jerry must pay the costs incurred by George in defending the suit after June 7. Jerry, however, claims that George's offer of judgment was not timely and should have been served by June 5. Assuming that none of the answer choices fall on a Saturday, Sunday, or a holiday, what was the proper deadline for service of the offer of judgment?

Bill works for the law firm of Matheson & Gilbert, which mainly focuses on commercial transactions and litigation. Bill, who was hired only one month earlier, has been assigned to work on the Miller lawsuit. Sandra Jackson, a junior partner in the firm, is the primary attorney on the Miller case, but Bill is aware that George Wilson at the Lewiston firm is co-counsel on the case. Bill gets a telephone call from Jill, who states she is a paralegal at the Lewiston firm. Jill then says that George Wilson would like a copy of the most recent draft of a motion that Sandra is working on in the Miller case and asks that Bill fax or e-mail a copy. Bill does not know Jill and has never communicated with anyone at the Lewiston firm. Can Bill fax or e-mail a copy of the draft without Sandra's permission?

Wilkey, Wendell & Waxman is a three-attorney law firm that practices in family and juvenile law. John Wendell, one of the partners, has accepted a case representing Gwendolyn Alexander, a prominent actress known for her roles in several romance films. Alexander wants to file for divorce from her husband, Jason House, a successful movie producer. Wendell asks Jordan, his paralegal, to review the file, prepare initial drafts of pleadings, and work up an initial spreadsheet estimating the marital estate. Cary is a legal secretary in the firm who works for another attorney. Cary stops by Jordan's office and asks if Jordan is working on the Alexander file and whether she can look through it to see if there's anything "interesting." Which of the following is the best way for Jordan to respond?

For almost one year, Karen has worked as a paralegal in a small law office with two attorneys. Karen works mostly for Lonnie, an experienced attorney who mainly handles juvenile defense cases. One of Lonnie's clients is Joey Hamilton, a fifteen-year-old boy who has been charged with breaking and entering. Joey's father, Clint Hamilton, hired Lonnie to represent Joey and is paying Lonnie's fees. As the case proceeds, Joey decides to accept a plea bargain to a lesser charge and a sentence of community service. On a day when Lonnie is out of the office, Clint calls Karen and says that he is paying for Lonnie's services and that he does not want Joey to accept the plea bargain. Clint then tells Karen to pass along his "order" to Lonnie not to enter the plea for Joey. From the following answer choices, which describes Karen's best approach?

Under Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party may serve on another party "no more than 25 interrogatories, including all discrete subparts." Andrew is a paralegal at a large law firm and is working with Fred, a senior partner, and Joseph, an associate, on a real estate litigation case. Fred wants to serve interrogatories on the opposing party and asks Joseph to draft them. Andrew will be responsible for proofreading and preparing the final drafts of all discovery requests, with a goal of serving them by the end of next week. Joseph prepares a draft of the interrogatories and provides them to Andrew, but Andrew notices that Joseph has prepared 28 interrogatories. From the options listed below, what is Andrew's best approach to this situation?

Camille is a paralegal who just started working for attorney John Baxter. John practices mainly in personal injury and civil litigation, but Camille has never worked in litigation before. In the Tran case, John filed a motion for summary judgment about three months ago. The defendant filed a response to the motion, and John then filed a reply. As such, the motion for summary judgment is fully briefed. John has now asked Camille to call the judge's office and find out if the hearing date has been set-and if it has not been set, work out a hearing date with the court and the defendant's attorney. The rule on ex parte communications prevents attorneys from speaking with the judge or the judge's staff about a case unless the opposing counsel is present. Can Camille call the court as requested?

Paula is a paralegal and is reviewing the following transcript of Larry Lawyer's conversation with Clara, a potential client: Larry: Hello, Clara. How can I help you today? Clara: Well, I was in an automobile accident yesterday and want to see if I can sue the driver of the black SUV. Larry: OK. Tell me about the accident. Clara: I was driving down Main Street in my brand new Ford truck-near the entrance to the Hollywood Shopping Center-and this idiot in a blue cowboy hat driving a black SUV pulled out of the parking lot without stopping. I slammed on the brakes, but couldn't avoid hitting the SUV. You know, that crazy hick had on blue cowboy boots that matched his hat and a turquoise belt buckle that matched his turquoise ring. Larry: What happened then? Clara: Well, after he climbed out of the passenger side door, he started yelling at me and wanted to know why I had hit his SUV. Then he said he would be late for an acting job at Silver Screen Studios and blamed me for that too. Like I really cared-I was going to miss the sale at Saks. Paula needs to identify the key facts of the incident Clara has described. Which of the following best identifies the key facts as described by Clara?

A Native American was stopped by a federal officer just outside a national park. The federal officer could see, in plain view, an eagle feather on the passenger-side seat next to the Native American. The Native American told the officer that the eagle feather would be used in a religious ceremony. The federal officer arrested the Native American for illegal possession of an eagle feather in violation of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Generally, under federal law, the possession, sale, and use of eagle feathers is prohibited, except that a Native American may possess and use eagle feathers if the Native American is an enrolled tribal member and the possession and use is for religious or cultural purposes. What else must the Native American show to avoid a conviction?

Artigue & Associates is a mid-size law firm that focuses on business law and real estate transactions. Paula is a paralegal with the firm and working with Alex Associate on a transaction involving the sale of Clifford Client's 100% interest in a construction company. One day, Paula gets a call from Clifford. Clifford explains that Alex told him that it's necessary to do considerable "due diligence" to complete the sale of his business. Clifford says, "I don't understand. I've always been diligent about doing my own work, but I'm just selling my construction company. Why do I need to do anything other than sign the contract and accept the payment?" Of the options listed below, what is the Paula's best approach to answering Clifford's question?

A deponent is to a deposition as a(n) ________ is to a(n) _________.

Paula Paralegal works for Adam Attorney, who practices estate planning and probate. Adam represents the executor of the estate of Harriet, who was a widow. Harriet and her husband had three children, and under Harriet's will, each of the three children is to receive an equal portion of the remaining estate, after expenses. The executor proposed and the three children agreed in writing to allow Adam to propose a distribution of the assets that would meet the one-third-each provision of Harriet's will. Adam has asked Paula to review the assets in Harriet's estate (see below) and prepare an initial proposed distribution of the estate. From the answer choices listed below, which answer will meet the one-third-each provision? Asset Value House $150,000 Investment Portfolio $ 75,000 Savings Account $ 20,000 Checking Account $ 20,000 Vehicle $ 20,000

Karen, Bobby's mother, brought Bobby into the kitchen, pointed to the broken glass and milk on the floor, and asked Bobby, "Isn't it true, Bobby, that you dropped a glass of milk on the floor?" Bobby's father, a lawyer, interjected by saying: "Objection!" The basis for this objection is that Karen's question is ___________.

The following facts were established during a hearing in a criminal case: - The police arrested John for suspicion of robbery. - He was arrested on Fifth Street as he was walking past the Shop-N-Save Mart. - The victim identified John from a book of mug shots collected by the police. - Immediately upon arrest John was advised of his Miranda rights-the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney. - At the police station, John was placed in an interrogation room. - A police officer interviewed John. - John confirmed certain information, including his name, home address, work address, and a fifteen-year-old conviction for theft. - All interrogation was stopped on John's request. - The police started interrogating John again one hour later without John's attorney. - John then confessed to the robbery. The right to remain silent provides that all interrogation must stop if the suspect invokes the right to remain silent. The right to counsel provides that, if assistance of counsel is requested by a suspect, all interrogation must stop and cannot be reinitiated unless counsel is present. If John later claimed the confession violated his Miranda rights, what other fact or facts must John prove?

Michael is a paralegal with Cranston & Cranston, a large national law firm that handles complex commercial litigation. Michael is working with attorney Jan Houston, who is defending a products liability case. Michael has been assigned to draft the initial disclosure statement, interrogatories, a request for production of documents, and five notices of deposition. Five minutes later, Jan also asks Michael to prepare five subpoenas to third parties, and then states that all of the work must be done within the next two days. From the answer choices listed below, what is Michael's best response?

Kip is a paralegal for Lauren, an attorney who practices general business law and litigation. Lauren had a longtime client who sold his successful manufacturing business and retired to his ranch in a rural part of the state. Neither Lauren nor Kip have heard from the client for some time. One day, the client calls the office when Lauren is out of the office. The client explains to Kip that he has received a copy of a default judgment against him and a notice of judicial foreclosure on the ranch. He continues to explain that he is seriously ill with cancer and has needed extensive medical treatment. He then states that he does not remember being served with a lawsuit, and asks Kip what can be done. Of the options listed below, what is Kip's best approach to answering the client's question?

Peter is a paralegal at a three-attorney law firm that provides legal services to small- and mid-size businesses. Peter works for Hillary Talbot, who assists small- and mid-size businesses with corporate transactions. One of Hillary's clients is C.L. Ballard, Inc. One day, Peter takes a call from Sally, who is the executive assistant to John Peterson, the president of C.L. Ballard, Inc. Sally asks Peter to e-mail copies of the purchase agreement for the small distribution company that C.L. Ballard, Inc. purchased last year. Peter remembers working on the purchase agreement and knows Sally from previous matters. Hillary, however, has told Peter never to send anything to C.L. Ballard, Inc. without discussing it with Hillary first. Can Peter send an electronic copy of the document without getting Hillary's permission?

Cameron is a paralegal for Roland, who is representing a plaintiff in a civil rights lawsuit in federal court. The opposing party has served interrogatories, and Roland has prepared draft answers to the interrogatories. After discussing the draft answers with the client, Roland gives the draft answers to Cameron and instructs her to prepare a final draft, double-check the references to the documents mentioned, and add the Bates ranges for each document referenced. As she is working on the draft answers, Cameron notices that the answer to Interrogatory No. 12 states an objection on the grounds that the interrogatory is irrelevant and designed to harass the plaintiff and/or delay the litigation. If Cameron thinks that a party cannot object to an interrogatory, is she correct?

Teri is a paralegal who works for a three-attorney law firm. Teri works mainly for Cheryl on family law and custody matters. David is a former client whose divorce was finalized about six months ago. One afternoon when Cheryl was in court, Teri received a call from David. David said that he really liked Cheryl's work on his case and that he wanted to hire the firm for another matter. David asked if he could drop off a check that afternoon payable to the firm's trust so that he could "withdraw" the funds at a later time. He said he wasn't interested in receiving interest on the funds and would pay a reasonable fee for time the funds were in the trust account. From the answer choices listed below, what is Jan's best response?