what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
sangr
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 4:45 pm

what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

Postby sangr » Thu Oct 11, 2012 9:38 am

hey guys

exam-wise, what do u do with a view when theres an exact split in supreme court decision?
Last edited by sangr on Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
ben4847
Posts: 789
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 11:38 pm

Re: what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

Postby ben4847 » Thu Oct 11, 2012 9:52 am

what cases are you refering to?

User avatar
Bronte
Posts: 2128
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

Postby Bronte » Thu Oct 11, 2012 10:12 am

A split in Supreme Court decision? Not quite sure what you mean, but if two decisions of the same court directly contradict one another, the later in time controls. On an exam, you might still discuss them in the alternative.

sangr
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

Postby sangr » Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:04 am

thanks all
Last edited by sangr on Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

TNFSkier16
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 2:20 pm

Re: what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

Postby TNFSkier16 » Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:08 am

If you signed up for BarBri, check online to see if the Richard Freer Civil Procedure Lecture is up yet. I think he has a framework on how to handle personal jurisdiction questions.

sangr
Posts: 459
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 4:45 pm

Re: what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

Postby sangr » Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:32 am

hey,

thats the thing

most supplements do this:

in order to measure PJ u gotta see:

first- are there contacts sufficient not to offend fair play and substantial justice?

second - is it fair and reasonable to bring suit in PJ? (which consists of D interest, state interest, P interest)

if i could just check on this in a chronological order im good. it would be so much easier if it were just this

but the way my prof lectures he just told us that:

there is a split in the supreme court:

one view o'connor: contacts are most important factor
other view brennan: we need to have a balance between contacts versus fair and reasonableness

----------------

so i guess im asking

1) is there a difference between how most supplements do this (a chronological checklist) versus how my prof is explaining it (tension between measuring PJ in terms of heavily only on contacts or balance between contacts and reasonableness).

im not sure if my prof is saying the same thing as supplements or if he really is implying that theres a different way to measure these things

2) ASSUMING that my prof sees a direct split in the way we measure PJ (due to split in supreme court decision), how do we approach an exam with these two different views? (brennan v o connor)

question two was actually my burning question but now that i think about it im not even sure if theres a difference between my prof and how most people do it, or im just perceiving it in that way b/c of the way he presents it to us

thanks!

LS-boundNYC
Posts: 227
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

Postby LS-boundNYC » Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:55 am

Sounds like your prof. recognizes that Asahi and other cases in that vein have never had a majority opinion endorsing a test. (Stevens, I believed, always filed his own dissent/concurrence so as never to endorse either O'Connor or Brennan's tests.)

Even if a supplement talks about only one of those, my strategy would be to discuss both. Your prof.'s preferences always control, and if he/she has hit on the split, so should you. So when the PJ question comes up on the exam, analyze it under both O'Connor's framework and then Brennan's framework. Maybe throw in a policy preference for one or the other, especially if the prof. has indicated he/she has one. That will rack up major points.

maudio129
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2012 5:08 pm

Re: what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

Postby maudio129 » Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:00 pm

My civ. pro. teacher really emphasizes these SCOTUS cases that do not have a majority opinion. For example (you might have learned it differently though): A sells its product to B, who then sells it to states X,Y, and Z. Alexa buys the product in state Z and is injured by its negligent manufacturing. Will the Z court have PJ over A?

If i saw this problem on a test, I would say (assuming the forum state's long arm statute applies):

Since the forum states long arm statute applies, we must determine if the exercise of personal jurisdiction will comport with the due process of clause of the 14th amendment. We must determine if A has any contacts with Z at all; that is, to what extent did A create a maintain a purposeful relationship with the forum state?

Since the product came in through the stream of commerce, we must apply the stream of commerce test set out in Asahi. Under Justice O Connor's approach A must not only have put the product into the stream, but must have engaged in specific conduct directed towards the forum state. A did not advertise in Z, conduct or solicit business in Z, or service its products in Z. However, Alexa will argue under Justice Brennan's approach because A put its product into the stream and had knowledge that it MAY end up in Z because it sells all of its products to B, which then sells them to Z.

{Then, 1) talk about if the court will exercise specific, or general jurisdiction, 2) ask if A's activities in Z were continuous and systematic or isolated and casual, 3) then bring in the WWV "fairness" factors to determine if it would be reasonable and fair for Z to exercise jurisdiction over A}.

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

Postby 09042014 » Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:07 pm

430 U.S. 188, bitches

User avatar
Ohiobumpkin
Posts: 465
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2011 9:50 am

Re: what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

Postby Ohiobumpkin » Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:27 pm

When there is no majority opinion, any opinions are treated as dicta (as in non-binding). In Asahi, some courts have adopted O'Connor's stream of commerce plus analysis, while other courts have stuck with Justice White's World-Wide original stream of commerce analysis w/o using the new SOC + factors. Apply both in your exam and get a big fat A .

idk
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 6:26 pm

Re: what do u do when theres a split in supreme court decision?

Postby idk » Mon Oct 15, 2012 1:32 am

Ohiobumpkin wrote: Apply both in your exam and get a big fat A .


if only...




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests