Criminal
Three cases about status offenses and holdings?
1. Robinson - Cannot punish a status
2. Powell - Can punish conduct resulting from a status
3. Grants pass - Can punish necessary conduct resulting from a status
What standard is the broad concept of duty based on?
Ordinary reasonable person
In what ways can a federal court assert subject matter jurisdiction?
1. Diversity of citizenship
2. Federal question
3. Supplemental jurisdiction
4. An area of law specifically delegated to the federal courts i.e. patents
Jordan, a resident of Illinois, is driving through Pennsylvania when they’re involved in a car accident with Taylor, a Pennsylvania resident. Jordan files a negligence lawsuit against Taylor in federal court, based on diversity jurisdiction. Under Pennsylvania state law, damages for pain and suffering are capped at $50,000 in car accident cases, but there is no such cap under federal common law principles.
Taylor argues that Pennsylvania’s damages cap should apply since the case arose in Pennsylvania and state law should govern substantive issues. Jordan counters that federal law, which would allow for full recovery, should apply to determine damages since the case is in federal court.
Analyze for choice of law
I: Does federal or state law govern in this case?
R: In Erie the court held that federal courts must apply state substantive law and federal procedural law. This was later refined in York where the court permitted federal court rules to supersede state rules where the federal rules would not be "outcome determinative". The court in Byrd added that where there are certain "countervailing considerations" fed. courts may overrule state law even when outcome determinative. Finally, in Hanna, the court refined this to say that when weighing those countervailing considerations one must look to the twin aims of Erie which sought to deter inequitable administration of justice and forum shopping.
A: Here, a court would likely find that that the difference in damages awarded to be a substantive state law. Whether the court could exercise federal supremacy would depend on the countervailing considerations outlined in Byrd and refined in Hanna. A court would likely find that by allowing federal law to prevail over state law Plaintiff's would be encouraged to forum shop in federal court to receive the benefit of no cap.
C: Therefore, the court would likely apply PA state law.
What are the 5 rules governing the creation of criminal offenses?
1. Must be legislatively enacted (Rogers)
2. Must be specific (Morales)
3. Must be general, no bills of attainder
4. Must be public
5. Must be prospective (no ex-post facto)
What duty is owed to each of the three visitor categories for premises liability?
1. Trespass - Refrain from willful or wanton injury (recklessness)
2. Licensee - warn of known or should-have-known hidden danger(s)
3. Exercise reasonable care in maintaining property and discovering and warning of hidden dangers
What is the constitutional requirement for diversity jurisdiction? What is the statutory requirement?
Con. - Minimal diversity (Tashire)
Stat. - Complete diversity (Strawbridge)
What is the vagueness test in Morales?
1. Does it encourage arbitrary incrimination and/or discrimination?
2. Does it fail to provide notice?
What is the broad standard for Breach?
Did you act as an ORP would?
How can a case implicate federal question jurisdiction and what cases give these methods?
1. Homles Creation Test - where the suit is brought under a federal CoA (American Well Works)
2. Embedded federal question - Where the case hinges on federal law (Grable and Sons).
Mistake of Law is an excuse when:
1. Willfulness is a requirement of the offense (Cheek)
2. Requires a legal analysis (Bray)
3. Lack of publication
4. When relying on an official statement (Twitchell)
What are the three approaches to children in negligence?
Tender Years Doctrine:
Under a certain age probably 7 a child is presumptively incapable of negligence
Between 7-14, you consider a child of his age and circumstances and what they would be capable of
MA Rule
Any child will be found capable of negligence if a fact finder finds a child in his circumstances would have acted differently
Restatement 2d
IF the actor is a child the standard of conduct to which he must conform to avoid being negligent is that of a reasonable person of like age, intelligence, and experience under like circumstances.
What are the three mandatory venues?
1. Residential
2. Transactional
3. Fallback
What is the Cheek test for willfulness?
The law imposed a duty on D
D knew of this duty
D voluntarily violated that duty
Two approaches to medical disclosure of risk?
Prudent patient
A Dr. has to look at what an ordinary reasonable patient would need to know to give informed consent
The information has to be “reasonable” and “material” - if it would have changed her mind
Ordinary and reasonable Dr. standard
Dr. need only say what a Dr. feels is necessary
Explanation of procedure, risks, side effects, and alternatives discharged as a reasonable, competent practitioner would
What factors does Grable and Sons say must be considered when determining whether a federal court can hear an embedded FQ?
Does the state claim NECESSARILY raise a federal issue?
Is it disputed?
Substantial?
Can a federal forum entertain this without disturbing the congressionally approved balance of federal and state judicial responsibilities? (See Merrell Dow),