Exam 10: Trial Courts: How Civil Cases Begin

A) charges by lawyers about the media
B) the dual use of criminal sanctions
C) very large sums of money
D) the application of standard legal norms

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Correct Answer

Answered by ExamLex AI

Political science can make several contr...

View Answer

Show Answer

A) the problem of causation
B) the absence of lawyers
C) the small number of parties
D) an inability to mobilize litigants

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

A) increase the geographic jurisdiction of a court
B) increase the caseload for annexation courts
C) provide a speedier, less expensive alternative to courts
D) provide criminal suspects with an additional appeal

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Correct Answer

Answered by ExamLex AI

Two factors that can influence a person's decision to sue are: 1. **Perceived Wrongdoing and Chance of Success**: One of the primary factors influencing the decision to sue is the individual's belief that they have been wronged in a manner that the legal system can address. This includes a violation of their rights, personal injury, breach of contract, or any other harm that the law recognizes as deserving of compensation or remedy. The strength of the evidence, the clarity of the applicable law, and the likelihood of a favorable outcome are critical considerations. If a person believes that they have a strong case and a high chance of winning, they are more likely to pursue legal action. Conversely, if the case seems weak or the laws are not clear, the individual may decide that suing is not worth the effort or expense. 2. **Costs and Resources**: The financial and emotional costs of litigation can be significant. Individuals will consider whether they have the financial resources to afford a lawyer and court fees, as well as the time and emotional energy to engage in what can be a lengthy and stressful process. The availability of alternative dispute resolution methods, such as mediation or arbitration, might also be a factor. If the potential damages or remedies sought are not substantial enough to justify the costs, or if the person lacks the resources to sustain a legal battle, they may be less inclined to sue. Additionally, the existence of contingency fee arrangements, where lawyers only get paid if the lawsuit is successful, can also influence the decision to sue by reducing the upfront financial risk for the plaintiff.

A) stare decisis
B) common law evolution
C) policy litigation
D) tort reform

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Correct Answer

Answered by ExamLex AI

Mediation and arbitration are both forms of alternative dispute resolution, but they have some key differences. Mediation is a voluntary process in which a neutral third party, the mediator, helps the disputing parties communicate and negotiate in order to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. The mediator does not make a decision or impose a solution on the parties; instead, they facilitate the discussion and help the parties explore their interests and options. The goal of mediation is to find a resolution that satisfies both parties and avoids the need for further legal action. Arbitration, on the other hand, is a more formal process in which a neutral third party, the arbitrator, hears arguments and evidence from both sides and then makes a decision to resolve the dispute. The decision of the arbitrator is usually binding, meaning that the parties must abide by the decision, similar to a court judgment. Arbitration is often used when the parties cannot reach a resolution through negotiation or mediation and need a final decision to settle the dispute. In summary, the main differences between mediation and arbitration are the level of formality and the role of the neutral third party. Mediation is more informal and focuses on facilitating communication and negotiation, while arbitration is a more formal process with a decision-making authority. Both methods have their own advantages and disadvantages, and the choice between them depends on the specific needs and preferences of the parties involved in the dispute.

Correct Answer

Answered by ExamLex AI

The view that Americans are "too quick t...

View Answer

Show Answer

A) are too formal
B) are too informal
C) result in lengthy delays
D) make work for too many lawyers

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Correct Answer

Answered by ExamLex AI

The Supreme Court reduced the punitive d...

View Answer

Show Answer

A) an adversarial contest
B) a disputing pyramid
C) a funnel-like process
D) a test of wills
E) a forum for negotiations

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

A) decreasing rapidly
B) increasing rapidly
C) staying relatively constant
D) fluctuating widely

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Correct Answer

verified

Show Answer

Correct Answer

Answered by ExamLex AI

One proposed change to the civil legal s...

View Answer

Show Answer

Correct Answer

Answered by ExamLex AI

A pyramid is a useful shape to describe the disputing process in the United States because it effectively illustrates the hierarchical structure and the narrowing of cases as they progress through the various stages of resolution. Here's why the pyramid shape is fitting: 1. **Broad Base for Initial Disputes**: The base of the pyramid represents the large number of disputes that arise at the lowest level. This includes all manner of conflicts, from small claims to family disputes, and everything in between. Just as the base of a pyramid is wide, so too is the range of initial disputes broad and encompassing. 2. **Filtering and Resolution at Lower Levels**: As you move up the pyramid, the number of disputes decreases. This is because many disputes are resolved at the lower levels of the system, whether through direct negotiation, mediation, arbitration, or rulings in lower courts. The pyramid shape reflects the fact that as disputes are resolved, fewer move on to the next stage. 3. **Limited Access to Higher Courts**: The middle of the pyramid represents the reduced number of cases that are appealed to higher courts. The pyramid narrows to indicate that not all cases are eligible or have the merit to be considered by appellate courts. This selective process ensures that only cases with significant legal questions or substantial impacts proceed. 4. **Apex for Supreme Decisions**: At the top of the pyramid is the Supreme Court, the highest legal authority in the United States. The apex represents the very small number of cases that are granted a hearing before the Supreme Court. The narrowness of the pyramid's top illustrates the exclusivity and the significant filtering process that leads to a Supreme Court review. 5. **Structural Stability and Finality**: The pyramid is an ancient symbol of stability and durability. In the context of the disputing process, it suggests that as cases ascend through the levels of the pyramid, the decisions made are increasingly stable and final. The apex, being the Supreme Court, provides the ultimate finality in legal disputes. 6. **Visual Representation of Authority**: The pyramid also visually represents the concentration of legal authority. As one moves up the pyramid, the authority of the courts increases, with the Supreme Court at the apex holding the ultimate judicial power. In summary, the pyramid shape is a useful metaphor for the disputing process in the United States because it captures the essence of the hierarchical legal system, the process of filtering and resolving disputes at various levels, and the concentration of judicial authority culminating in the Supreme Court.