barkschool wrote: WestWingWatcher wrote:
InterAlia1961 wrote:I've found a couple of misstatements of law on Adaptibar's answers. Here's a doosy. Number 1702,Civ Pro. Here's part of the "correct" answer:
"A corporation's principal place of business is typically where it is headquartered." WRONG!!
A principal's principal place of business is not where they are headquartered unless there are facts to support it. A corporation is a citizen of both the state of its incorporation and where they have their principal place of business. The test for principle place of business is the "nerve center" test, not the"headquartered" test.
But isn't the nerve center often where the company is headquartered? So, the statement that the PPB typically
being where the corporation is HQ isn't really incorrect? Or do I have my stuff mixed up?
Interalia, that AB rule statement is pretty much correct
ppb pretty much is HQ
now, if the question said "X Corp has its HQ in State A, but its nerve center (or its executive all conduct the strategic business in) State B"
Then the PPB would be State B. But I have never seen an answer choice where you had to dissect the two like this. For all intents and purposes the HQ is the PPB
Without talking about what actually appears on the MBE, please know this. Any question where an answer states "because the corporation is headquartered in xxxx" is wrong. There are many scenarios where the company has its principal place of business (without calling it that) someplace other than where it is headquartered. The test is the "nerve center test," period.
Here's another one. Question 1120, crim pro. The facts say that law enforcement cut the fence, then saw a scarecrow in the adjacent field which was surrounded by the fence that had been cut. This is NOT the proper application of the open fields doctrine, because they went onto the land without a warrant and then saw the scarecrow. Under the open fields doctrine, one has no expectation of privacy in the fields around their home if people can see them from the air or passing by, but trust me on this, as I've been involved in nasty litigation over it, law enforcement cannot cut a fence, walk out to the back forty, and then claim they saw something under the open fields doctrine. Won that one, baby.