Cal-Ban 2010 is a weight loss drug made by We Care Products, Inc., a Florida corporation, and marketed through RSA Industries, another Florida corporation. Enticed by ads for Cal-Ban that she saw on social media, Dan Tucker's wife bought the drug at Preston's Pharmacies, Inc., in Murfreesboro, Tennessee for her husband. Within a week, Tucker suffered a ruptured colon. Alleging that the injury was caused by Cal-Ban, Tucker sued Preston's Pharmacies, RSA, and We Care Products in a Tennessee state court. RSA and We Care argued that Tennessee did not have personal jurisdiction over them because RSA and We Care were Florida corporations. Also, they argued that if Tennessee did have personal jurisdiction, the appropriate court was the federal district court.

Question 1 (5 points)

If the court that is resolving the issue of jurisdiction applies the sliding scale standard, which of the following is the most likely result?

Question 1 options:

	The court will determine that jurisdiction is proper because substantial business was conducted over the website.
	The court will determine that jurisdiction is not proper because the level of online interactivity is not sufficient to satisfy the standard.
	The court will determine that jurisdiction is not proper because the social media ad was passive.
	The court will determine that jurisdiction is proper because social media was used to attract the purchaser.

Question 2 (5 points)

Which of the following is the best statement of the general legal rule that is used by courts to resolve the issue of personal jurisdiction over a defendant from another country or state?

Question 2 options:

	A state court has authority over cases involving questions of state law.
	A court can exercise jurisdiction over property that is located within its boundaries.
	A defendant must have minimum contacts with a state in order for a court to conclude that it is fair to exercise authority over the defendant.

Question 3 (5 points)

Assume that the court does exercise jurisdiction over this defendant. Which of the following is the best statement of the consequence of this conclusion?

Question 3 options:

	The court will address the merits of the allegations against the defendant.
	The court will dismiss the case.
	The court will enter a judgement against the defendant.

Question 4 (5 points)

Assume that this case is decided by a Tennessee Circuit Judge, who concludes that the court does not have jurisdiction over We Care Products, Inc. or its officers and directors. The conclusion is upheld when the case is appealed. Stare decisis applies to this decision. What does that mean?

Question 4 options:

	The decision is not binding on any other courts; it does not set a precedent.
	The decision is binding on other courts in Florida
	The decision is binding on other courts in Tennessee.

Question 5 (5 points)

Assume that this case was filed in a Tennessee Trial Court and heard initially by a Circuit Judge. Which of the following is an accurate statement about the way that such a judge would have been selected. This judge would have been

Question 5 options:

	nominated, confirmed and hold office for a term of 8 years and then run in a retention election.
	nominated, confirmed and would hold office for life.
	elected by popular vote.

Question 6 (5 points)

Assume that the case is heard by a Tennessee Circuit Judge who concludes that the court does not have jurisdiction over We Care Products, Inc or its officer and directors. The conclusion is appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals. Which of the following is an accurate statement about the way that the judges on the Tennessee Court of Appeals would have been selected? They would have been

Question 6 options:

	nominated, confirmed and would hold office for life.
	elected by popular vote.
	nominated, confirmed and hold office for a term of 8 years, then run in a retention election.

Question 7 (5 points)

If the federal district court in Tennessee does exercise subject matter jurisdiction, will that court have original or appellate jurisdiction?

Question 7 options:

	Appellate jurisdiction, the authority to review the actions of the trial court but not to conduct the trial itself.
	Appellate jurisdiction, the authority to conduct a trial.
	Original jurisdiction, the authority to conduct a trial.
	Original jurisdiction, the authority to review the actions of the trial court but not to conduct the trial itself.

Question 8 (5 points)

On what basis might the federal district court in Tennessee exercise subject matter jurisdiction in this case?

Question 8 options:

	Question of State Law
	Stare Decisis
	Diversity of Citizenship