Sources of American law: US constitution, Federal status, State constitution, State

laws, Common law principles, Precedents, Foreign decision. Remedies at law: if one
person wrongs another in some way the kings courts could award as compensation
one or more of the following: land, money, items of value. Remedies in equity:
equity is a branch of law founded on what might be described as notions of justice
and fair dealing; that seeks to supply a remedy when no adequate remedy at law is
available: Specific performance (ordering a party to perform an agreement as
promised) Injunction(ordering a party to cease engaging in a specific activity or to
undo some wrong or injury) Rescission( the cancellation of a contractual obligation).
A defense is an argument raised by the defendant indicating why the plaintiff should
not obtain the remedy sought. Maxims: whoever seeks equity must do equity;
where there is equal equity, the law must prevail; one seeking the aid of an equity
must come to the court with clean hands; Equity will not suffer a wrong to be
without a remedy; equity regards substance rather than form; equity aids the
vigilant not those who rest on their rights. Legal reasoning: is the reasoning process
used by judges in deciding what law applies to a given dispute and then applying
that law to the specific facts or circumstances of the case: what are the facts and
issues, what rules of law to apply to the case, how do the rules apply to the specific
case and circumstances, draw your conclusion. Deductive reasoning: Major premise,
minor premise, conclusion. Linear reasoning. Reasoning by analogy. Civil law: spells
out the rights and duties between persons and between persons and their
governments, and the relief available when a persons rights are violated, in a civil
case a private party sues another private party to comply with a duty or to pay for
the damaged caused by the failure to comply to a duty. Criminal law: is concerned
with wrongs committed against public as a whole. Criminal acts are defined and
prohibited by local, state, or federal government statutes. Criminal defendants are
thus prosecuted by a public official such as a DA on the behalf of the state not by
their victims or other private parties. Chapter 2: Jurisdiction: the power to speak
law, area in which a court or courts have the power to apply the law. It must have
two types of jurisdiction, jurisdiction over the person of property , and jurisdiction
over the subject matter of the dispute. Chapter 7: Crime: can be defined as a
wrong against society proclaimed in a statute and punishable by a fine and/or
imprisonment. Infancy, Intoxication: it must be involuntary, Insanity: prove he did
not know the act he committed is wrong and prove he did not know the quality and
nature of the act, Mistake of law: there is criminal intent mistake of fact: negates
criminal intent. Consent: if a victim consents to a crime or encouraging a person
intending a criminal act to commit it, Duress. Justifiable use of force: in case of
deadly force, force that can cause death or cause body harm. Chapter 12: Tort
law: the basic purpose of tort law is to provide remedies for the invasion of various
protected interests. Assault: threat, Battery: physical harm.

Case 1: Ernesto arrested for rape and kidnap of 18 age woman, brought to phoenix
Arizona police station, questioned by two officers, written confession signed by
Miranda. Paragraph at the top the confession has been made voluntarily without
threats of promises of immunity, with full knowledge of my legal rights,
understanding any statement I make may be used against me. He was not advised
of its constitutional rights that he had the right to remain silent and to have a
lawyer. The confession was admitted as evidence at the trial and Miranda was
convicted and sentenced to prison for 20 to 30 years. Appeal, but the Arizona
Supreme Court affirmed his conviction. The Miranda case was held to US Supreme
Court. The US supreme court held that Miranda could not be convicted of the crime
on the basis of his confession because his confession was inadmissible as evidence.
Case 2: Roy Bickford was married in july 1997 and moved to Maine with his wife in
June 1998. In September his wife left him and moved to north Carolina they agreed
each will take care of his debts and divorced in 1999. Bickfords wife obtained
medical care for her daughter at Onslow Memorial Hospital in North Carolina.
Bickford was not legally related to his wifes daughter and never agreed to pay for
the services. Without telling him the hospital held him financially responsible and
notified credit reporting agencies that he had been placed in collection for failing to
pay. He asked the hospital to correct this statement, but it refused. Meanwhile, his
bank would not qualify him for a mortgage because of the apparent outstanding
debt. Bickford filed a suit in a Maine state court against the hospital. The defendant
asked the court to dismiss the complaint on the ground that Maine had no
jurisdiction over the hospital. It treats patients in North Carolina and does not own
any property, have any contractual relationships, or solicit any business or funding
in Maine of from Maine residents. The court dismissed the complaint. Bickford
appealed to the Maine supreme court and the states highest court. Maines
supreme judicial court vacated the lower courts dismissal of Bickfords complaint
and remanded the case to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with
this opinion. Maine had a legitimate interest in the subject of the suit, the
defendant reasonably could have anticipated litigation in Maine, and Maines
exercise of jurisdiction was in line with traditional notions of fair play and
substantial justice.