Reference no: EM133195488 , Length: word count:750

Question 1. Yuna, suffered a personal injury while operating her tractor at home in California. She filed a negligence suit in federal court against the manufacturer, Jack Doe Tractor, Inc. Jack Doe Tractor is incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in Illinois. Yuna also sued the seller, Cali Equipment Inc, which is incorporated in California with its principal place of business in California. Yuna and Cali Equipment informally agreed to settle out of court, but the agreement was subject to approval by Cali Equipment's insurer. Before a final agreement was reached regarding settlement with Cali Equipment, Jack Doe filed a motion in federal court for dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Qa. Should the court grant the motion for dismissal based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction?

Qb. If Cali settles with Yuna, and Yuna dismisses the case against Cali before the court decides on the motion. Should the court grant the motion for dismissal based on lack of subject matter jurisdition?

Question 2. Sam was illegally growing marijuana in his home using heat lamps. The police randomly selected his street to search for illegal activity. Without any kind of a warrant, they used a thermal imager, an instrument that detects heat emissions, and determined that given the amount of emissions coming from Sam's house, he must be engaged in criminal marijuana cultivation. The police immediately broke down Sam's door, searched his home, and arrested him. The police officer in charge told Sam that he had no right to stay silent and that he might as well confess. Sam proceeded to confess to growing marijuana and a number of other crimes. The judge was so angry with Sam that he threw him in jail for two months without any kind of hearing. Sam's court-appointed lawyer, who just graduated from law school, is not sure if the police acted legally in Sam's case by using the thermal imager. Sam's lawyer also questions whether Sam had a right to remain silent, and he is concerned that the judge has not granted Sam a hearing.

Qa. Identify any issues involving the actions of the police and judge. How should these issues be addressed by Sam's lawyer and how should they be resolved by a court?

Qb. What if Sam did not own the home that he was living in, and in fact, the home had been abandoned before Sam broke in and established his growing operation? In what way, if any, does this change your answer to 2a?

Question 3. Rosalba, a resident of New Mexico, claims that Pet Food Company Inc., sold dog food that made her dog, Champ, sick. Champ is a prize-winning poodle. He survived the pet food fiasco only after traveling to a veterinarian in Florida specializing in poodles and only because he had two very expensive surgeries. Additionally, his ability to sire has been impaired, and Rosalba will earn no more breeding fees from Champ. Her alleged damages are $100,000. Pet Food Company Inc., is incorporated in Delaware, with its principal place of business in New Mexico.

Qa. Rosalba would like to bring the lawsuit in Federal Court in Florida, where her veterinarian is located, so it will be easy for the vet to testify at the trial. What would you tell her and why?

Qb. Rosalba would like to obtain additional evidence regarding the knowledge of Pet Food Company about any contaminants in the dog food, including whether the company was aware of any contamination and whether any other customers have contacted and/or sued Pet Food Company. How can Rosalba get this information?