Top Law Schools

Here's an MBE question that I've been trying to figure out. I correctly answered C. And the given explanation stated federal law applied because it was a federal question case. But what if this was a diversity case? What would the answer be? I'm not entirely sure it would be choice D because of Erie. And I am thinking C would still be the right choice. Or would such a question be too complicated for an MBE analysis?

A pharmacist filed a lawsuit against her employer, a hospital, in federal court in State A, claiming that the hospital violated the pharmacist's rights under Title VII's employment laws during the two weeks the pharmacist worked for the hospital. After two days of testimony, the jury returned a verdict for the pharmacist and awarded her $2,750,000 in compensatory damages. Under federal law, a judge who believes compensatory damages are so excessive as to "shock the conscience" can offer the plaintiff the choice between a new trial or remittitur of the excessive damages. Under State A law, judges can order remittitur if the court thinks damages are "excessive."

Which of the following is true?
A. The hospital should submit only a motion for remittitur, on the ground that the jury's damage award "shocks the conscience."
B. The hospital should submit only a motion for remittitur, on the ground that the jury's damage award is "excessive."
C. The hospital should submit both a motion for new trial and, in the alternative, a motion for remittitur, on the ground that the jury's damage award "shocks the conscience."
D. The hospital should submit both a motion for new trial and, in the alternative, a motion for remittitur, on the ground that the jury's damage award is "excessive."

6TimeFailure wrote:Here's an MBE question that I've been trying to figure out. I correctly answered C. And the given explanation stated federal law applied because it was a federal question case. But what if this was a diversity case? What would the answer be? I'm not entirely sure it would be choice D because of Erie. And I am thinking C would still be the right choice. Or would such a question be too complicated for an MBE analysis?

A pharmacist filed a lawsuit against her employer, a hospital, in federal court in State A, claiming that the hospital violated the pharmacist's rights under Title VII's employment laws during the two weeks the pharmacist worked for the hospital. After two days of testimony, the jury returned a verdict for the pharmacist and awarded her $2,750,000 in compensatory damages. Under federal law, a judge who believes compensatory damages are so excessive as to "shock the conscience" can offer the plaintiff the choice between a new trial or remittitur of the excessive damages. Under State A law, judges can order remittitur if the court thinks damages are "excessive."

Which of the following is true?
A. The hospital should submit only a motion for remittitur, on the ground that the jury's damage award "shocks the conscience."
B. The hospital should submit only a motion for remittitur, on the ground that the jury's damage award is "excessive."
C. The hospital should submit both a motion for new trial and, in the alternative, a motion for remittitur, on the ground that the jury's damage award "shocks the conscience."
D. The hospital should submit both a motion for new trial and, in the alternative, a motion for remittitur, on the ground that the jury's damage award is "excessive."

The answer would still be C in diversity case, because there is a federal law on point that directly conflicts with the state law (Supremacy Clause).