Answered: Brandon is a resident of Wyoming. Cody… | bartleby

Related questions

Question

Brandon is a resident of Wyoming. Cody is a resident of Nebraska. They are involved in a car accident in Colorado.
Brandon suffers serious injuries that result in $50,000 in medical bills. Brandon must sue Cody in
ос
a. federal court due to diversity jurisdiction.
b. federal court due to federal question jurisdiction.
C. state court.
d. an appellate court.

Expert Solution

Trending now

This is a popular solution!

Step by step

Solved in 3 steps

SEE SOLUTION Check out a sample Q&A here

Blurred answer

Similar questions

in the Escobar case, Universal Health Services, Inc Petitioner v. United States and Massachusetts, es rel. Julio Escobar, April 19, 2016. This unit treated the relators’ allegations in this case as presenting legally false claims. Explain why the relators’ allegations in the case could actually be viewed as presenting factually false claims.
1-5. THE DOCTRINE OF PRECEDENT. Sandra White operated a travel agency. To obtain lower airline fares for her nonmilitary clients, she booked military-rate travel by forwarding fake military identification cards to the airlines. The U.S. government charged White with identity theft, which requires the “use” of another’s identification. As background, the court in the White case had two cases that represented precedents. In the first case, David Miller obtained a loan to buy land by representing that certain investors had approved the loan when, in fact, they had not. Miller’s conviction for identity theft was overturned because he had merely said that the investors had done something when they had not. According to the court, this was not the “use” of another’s identification. In the second case, Kathy Medlock, an ambulance service operator, had transported patients for whom there was no medical necessity to do so. To obtain payment, Medlock had forged a physician’s signature. The court…
Girly will have the burden of "going forward," meaning that she has to establish the elements of her claim. If she meets the "prima facie claim," then the defendant MMLP will have the burden that the actions taken against Girly were for a legal reason. If MMLP can meet this burden, the burden then shifts back to Girly to prove that the reason MMLP gave is a pretext (or coverup) for discrimination. (See Chapter 21, p.454) 1. Sexual Discrimination: Does Girly have a via claim for intentional sexual discrimination, that is that she is being treated differently based on her gender? Reference specific facts from the case and apply them to the law to reach your final opinion. 2. Sexual Harassment: Does Girly have a viable claim of sexual harassment against MMLP based on "quid pro quo" sexual harassment OR hostile working environment. Both types are discussed in your text.
Which of the following is NOT true of criminal fraud cases? A. It is easier for the prosecution to prevail in a criminal case than it is for the plaintiff to prevail in a civil case. B. Juries generally must rule unanimously on guilt. C. The burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. D. The government/prosecution has the burden of proof.
Liability of Members Harold, Jasmine, Caesar, and Yuan form Microhard. com, LLC, a limited liability company, to sell computer hardware and software over the Internet. Microhard. com, LLC, hires Heather, a re-cent graduate of the University of Chicago and a brilliant software designer, as an employee. Heather’s job is to design and develop software that will execute a computer command when the computer user thinks of the next command he or she wants to execute on the computer. Using Heather’s research, Microhard. com, LLC, develops the Third Eye software program that does this. Microhard. com, LLC, sends Heather to the annual Comdex computer show in Las Vegas, Nevada, to unveil this revolutionary software. Heather goes to Las Vegas, and while there, she rents an automobile to get from the hotel to the computer show and to meet interested buyers at different locations in Las Vegas. While Heather is driving from her hotel to the site of the Comdex computer show, she negligently causes an…
Leonardo has a house on the beach in California. The state wants to expand public beaches and subsequently takes Leonardo’s house, paying him $20,000 even though the house is worth $500,000. Leonardo can argue (A) that his First Amendment rights were violated; (B) that his Fifth Amendment rights were violated; (C) that his Eighth Amendment rights were violated; (D) that his Tenth Amendment rights were violated. Answer:______ Explanation: Only typing answer
Which of the following is a purpose of tort law? Multiple Choice To compensate innocent persons who are injured. To impose criminal penalties on those who commit wrongdoing. To allow a remedy for breach of contract claims. To encourage vigilante justice.
Bob wants to acquire a manufacturing plant. He hires Grace as his attorney to assist him in making the purchase. Grace suggests that Bob have an Environmental Study performed on the property because previous owners of the property operated the manufacturing plant and the manufacturing process resulted in hazardous by-products. Bob doesn't want to pay for the study. Which of the following is true? Bob shouldn't pay for the Environmental Study. Only those who actually improperly dispose of hazardous substances can be held liable as potentially responsible parties under CERCLA Bob should pay for the Environmental Study. Although he has no reason to know that hazardous substances were disposed of on the property, he could still be liable for clean up costs under CERCLA because current owners or operators of a site can be potentially responsible parties under CERCLA Bob shouldn't pay for the Environmental Study. The current owners or operators of a site are not potentially responsible…
In order to prove disparate treatment employment discrimination under Title VII, what is the first showing a plaintiff must make? Multiple Choice The plaintiff would provde beyond a reasonable doubt that discrimination occured. The plaintiff would show that the reason given by the employer for the discrimination was a mere pretext. The plaintiff would demonstrate a prima facie case of discrimination. The plaintiff would show that the plaintiff gave the defendant the opportunity to remedy the situation before filing suit but that the defendant refused. The plaintiff would show that other people were also being discrirminated against.
Rose is recovering from recent abdominal surgery and is suffering from intense pain. She has an MRI, which shows surgical gauze left in her abdomen. Rose may sue under O O O O a. strict liability. b. res ipsa loquitur. c. product liability. d. an intentional tort.
Rim Corporation makes tire rims that it sells to Superior Vehicles, Inc., which installs them on cars. One set ofrims is defective, which an inspection would reveal. Superior does not inspect the rims. The car with the defectiverims is sold to Town Auto Sales, which sells the car toUri. Soon, the car is in an accident caused by the defective rims, and Uri is injured. Is Superior Vehicles liable?Explain your answer. (See Strict Product Liability.)
Aa

SEE MORE QUESTIONS