Federal Courts Outline - Rudenstine - Fall 2001

Federal Courts Outline - Rudenstine - Fall 2001 -...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Elan Weinreb – Federal Courts Outline – Page 1 of 146 Elan Weinreb September 10, 2001 Federal Courts – Rudenstine Federal Courts Outline The exam: There are no midterms and no papers. The final grade in this course is based upon the final exam. The exam this year will be open book. You can bring anything you want, except another person. The exam will probably not be more than 3.5 hours. There will be no short answer or true/false; only essay questions. 790-0310 = The Prof.’s office number. His e-mail is [email protected] . His HOME NUMBER (from 7 A.M. to 10 P.M.) is (212) 864-1160. I. Introduction – A. This course is about power, judicial power and the struggle between the courts and the Congress over which courts should have jurisdiction. Courts without jurisdiction are powerless. Courts with jurisdiction have the power to decide decisions and have those decisions enforced. B. Congress must decide whether the Federal Courts, the state courts, or no courts should have power and/or under what conditions judicial power should be exercised. But who decides whether Congress has outstripped its power? The Supreme Court. Thus, the Supreme Court decides whether power allocation is made constitutionally. C. This course is a competitive jurisprudence to what might be called “rights” theory. It complements and contrasts in some ways with individual rights. While hard, this course is more satisfying than Constitutional law. There is much more of a cohesive system of rules and theory in this course than in the Constitutional law courses. In this course, there is more agreement about underlying premises. The system itself is more of a closed box. There are edges to the board. II. Congress and Article III Courts – A. Sheldon v. Sill – 1. Rule(s) of Law: The disposal of the judicial power in Article III of the Constitution belongs to Congress 99% of the time. 2. Facts: Sill, a citizen of New York, brought suit against Sheldon, a citizen of Michigan, as assignee of a mortgage and bond. Hastings, a www.swapnotes.com
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Elan Weinreb – Federal Courts Outline – Page 2 of 146 citizen of Michigan, was the assignor to Sheldon. As a result of the eleventh section of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which specified that an assignee may not bring suit in a federal court unless his assignor could bring suit, Sheldon asserted a lack of jurisdiction defense. 3. What could Sill have argued in this case? 4. A: There is really still here diversity of jurisdiction. What would be the legal standard here for argument? 5. A: The Constitution is the legal standard, Article III, Section 2. This specifies that cases and controversies of citizens of different states fall under the judicial power. a)
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 146

Federal Courts Outline - Rudenstine - Fall 2001 -...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online