WK 2 - Team B - State of Confusion Paper

WK 2 - Team B - State of Confusion Paper - State of...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
State of Confusion 1 State of Confusion Dominique Duprez, Joseph Martinez, Dorothy Peck, Hugo Soll, David Trejo January 25, 2010 BUS/415 – Business Law Instructor: Rob Tischer
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
State of Confusion 2 State of Confusion In 1788, the states formally approved the Constitution, creating three branches of the federal government, allocating power to those branches, and limiting that power to protect the rights of individuals (Cheeseman, 2010). Whereas the states delegated some specific powers to the government, called enumerated powers; they also share power with the government, referred to as federalism. The state governments retain power over local issues and any other power that is not specifically assigned to the federal government in the Constitution. This paper analyzes a state enacted statute requiring a specific truck hitch be used within the state, determines if such statutes are constitutional, outlines court jurisdiction over such matters, and defines the stages a civil suit must follow. Jurisdiction over Tanya’s suit The courts that will have jurisdiction could be either the federal trial courts of general jurisdiction or the state court of Denial. First, there will be a review of why it could go to federal court. Then there will be a review of why it could go to the state of Denials court. Sound reasons exist why the suit could be brought to federal court. First is the location of the corporate citizen that is bringing the case to trial. The company, owned by Tanya Trucker, is located in the state of Denial. The state statute was brought about in the state of Confusion may have underlying reasoning for the passage of the statute. The company that manufactures the hitch resides in the state of Confusion. This may have played a role in lobbying of the state statute. Given these facts, it may be difficult to find an unbiased court in the state of Confusion. Taking it to federal court ensures that there will be a fair trial for all. Because the lawsuit in question is non-federal, it can fall under the diversity if citizenship (Cheeseman, 2010). Due of the diversity of citizenship of Tanya Trucker, the case can be tried in federal court. The other requirement that would need to be met is that the demand exceeds
Background image of page 2
State of Confusion 3 $75,000. In this case, the standard hitch ballrace turntable is approximately $2,200 per hitch, not including installation or additional parts (Western Truck Sales, n.d.). With a fleet of at least 25 trucks, the minimum amount requirement would be met. If
Background image of page 3

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 08/21/2010 for the course ACCT MKTG321 taught by Professor Ms.kris during the Spring '10 term at DeVry Long Beach.

Page1 / 7

WK 2 - Team B - State of Confusion Paper - State of...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

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