{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Civil Procedure Exam - Spring 2006

Civil Procedure Exam - Spring 2006 - (J Exam Number TEMPLE...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
Background image of page 3

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: (J Exam Number TEMPLE UNIVERSITY of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education BEASLEY SCHOOL OF LAW Civil Procedure I Course 402 Section 002 Spring Semester 2006 Professor N. Jeremi Duru Final Examination Friday, May 12, 2006 8:30am-llz30am infirm 1. This is a limited universe open book exam, meaning you may have with you during the exam your Friedenthal, Miller, Sexton & Hershkoff casebook, your Friedenthal, Miller, Sexton & Hershkofl' Supplement, and any notes, outlines, or other materials you created alone or as part of a group. The use of any other resources is prohibited. 2. The exam consists of 4 pages including this one. 3. If you choose to write your answers in bluebooks, please write on only the front of each page, please use a pen rather than a pencil, and please number the bluebooks (assuming you use more than one bluebook) in the order you would like them read. 4. This exam is subject to the Law School’s Code of Student Conduct and Disciplinary Procedures. 5‘ Exam questions must be returned with your answers. Please consider the following facts and then answer questions 1(a), 1(b), and 1(c) below: Gary Gardner loved the flower beds in his front and back yards. For several years running, he took first place in the Annual Fabulous Flower Beds of Philadelphia (“FFBP”) contest. Winning the contests proved to be very lucrative. In fact, first place prize money, together with endorsement deals from nurseries across the Philadelphia area, had, in the year 2003, added up to almost $80,000 for Gardner. Two years ago, however, Gardner’s prize flowers, his tulips, struggled. Squirrels, it seemed, were feasting on the tulips after they broke through the soil but before they blossomed. Needless to say, Gardner did not place in the 2004 FFBP contest. He was crestfallen. In the spring of 2005, he sprinkled his tulips with cayenne pepper to ward off the squirrels, but the pepper seemingly made the tulips more delectable. The squirrels devoured them more quickly than in 2004. Gardner vowed 2006 would be different, and he took early action to ensure it would. During January of 2006, Gardner hired Tanya’s Terrific Tulips (“Tanya’s”), a company specializing in maximizing tulips’ potential, to treat his tulips such that his flower beds would return to their pre-2004 splendor. Tanya’s, based in Wilmington, Delaware, rarely treated tulips in Philadelphia, but Gardner offered to pay well above market price, so Tanya’s agreed to do the job. After viewing pictures of Gardner’s mutilated 2004 and 2005 tulips, Tanya’s recommended the Deluxe Stubborn Squirrel Stopper Treatment (the “Squirrel Stopper”). Tanya’s explained to Gardner that the ingredients for the Squirrel Stopper were manufactured by a Piscataway, New Jersey-based company called Yard Protector. Although Yard Protector was a very large company and Tanya’s accounted for only five percent (5%) of its sales, Tanya’s assured Gardner that Yard Protector was always timely in its shipments of ingredients to Tanya’s headquarters in Wilmington. Once Tanya’s received the shipped ingredients, they were blended to become the Squirrel Stopper, which would be available to Gardner upon request. Gardner wanted assurances that the Squirrel Stopper would damage neither his tulips nor his other flowers. Both Tanya’s and Yard Protector warranted that the Squirrel Stopper was entirely safe for all flowers. In March of 2006, as Gardner’s tulips emerged from the ground, Tanya’s administered the Squirrel Stopper. The Squirrel Stopper successfully prevented the squirrels from eating the tulips. When Gardner’s tulips blossomed, however, they were grotesquely shriveled and discolored, as were all of the other flowers in Gardner’s flower beds. Gardner was despondent upon observing the sad state of his flower beds, and his humiliation was complete when his neighborhood’s Home & Garden newsletter published a photo essay titled “The Rise and Fall of Gary Gardner,” which detailed the depths to which Gardner’s once spectacular flower beds had fallen. An incensed and frazzled Gary Gardner walks into your law office, articulates the above facts provide Gardner viable negligence claims against both Tanya’s and Yard Protector). Question lgalz Gardner inquires as to the state or states in which he might be able to sue Tanya’s and Yard Protector and whether he might be able to sue in federal court. Please answer Gardner’s questions. (Suggested Time Allotment: 75 minutes) Question 11b}: Gardner informs you he has recently learned that Tanya’s and Yard Protector were defendants under virtually identical factual circumstances in a previous suit and that the court in that case found for the plaintiff on negligence grounds. Gardner asks you whether the court’s finding in the previous suit might have relevance to the action he wants to bring against Tanya’s and Yard Protector. Please answer Gardner’s question. (Suggested Time Allotment: 40 minutes) Question 1(cl: Gardner is pleased that he has viable negligence claims, but he knows — because you’ve told him — that the claims would be based on state common law. This makes Gardner nervous, because he is afraid that if his claims end up in federal court, the federal court won’t apply state law. Gardner asks you whether his concern is well-founded. Please respond to Gardner’s question. (Suggested Time Allotment: 30 minutes) Please consider the following facts and then answer question 2 below: Adelaide Adams, who lives in Scranton, Pennsylvania, worked for years as an accountant at Ace Accounting, a Scranton, Pennsylvania-based accounting firm. In April of 2006, however, she was terminated. She believes she was terminated on the basis of successfiil employment discrimination case, She tells you she wants to bring the claims together in one court and she wants that court to be a federal court. Specifically, she wants to sue in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, because she believes the judges of that court would be more sympathetic to her claim than the judges of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, in which Scranton is located. Question 2: Will Adams be able to brin so, will she be able to bring them in the United District of Pennsylvania? (Suggested Time Allotment: 35 minutes) g her claims together in federal court? If States District Court for the Eastern END OF EXAMINATION ...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}