During jury selection at his state court trial for aggravated murder and related offenses, the state used all 6 of their peremptory challenges to strike the only 6 black individuals from the jury. The defendant objected and argued that his case should be dismissed.

What is the best answer for what the court should do next?

Question 1 options:

	Deny the motion because the defendant was not able to prove that the prosecutor struck the individuals from the jury pool based solely on their race.
	Dismiss the case and request that a new panel of jurors be brought to the courtroom to begin the process of voir dire again.
	Let the prosecutor have a chance to be heard to see if the prosecutor had non-discriminatory reasons for striking the 6 jurors.
	Grant the motion because it is inconceivable that a prosecutor was not acting in a discriminatory manner in violation of the 14th Amendment.

 

Question 2 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, the USSC granted the Defendant's 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, ruling that to survive a motion to dismiss, Plaintiff's complaint must:

Question 2 options:

	Allege factual matter that suggests the probability that an agreement was made.
	Allege factual matter that is consistent with the possibility that an agreement existed.
	Allege factual matter that suggests by a preponderance of the evidence that an agreement was made.
	Allege factual matter that suggests the plausibility that an agreement was made.

 

Question 3 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Bias v. Advantage International, Inc., the D.C. Circuit Court stated that:

Question 3 options:

	The party moving for summary judgment carries the initial burden of identifying parts of the record that allegedly demonstrate an absence of a genuine issue of material fact.
	Summary judgment is appropriate when a party does not show the existence of an essential element in its case if it will bear the burden of proof at trial.
	Once the moving party has satisfied its burden, the burden shifts to the nonmoving party to show that there is more than some metaphysical doubt to the material facts.
	All of the above.

 

Question 4 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Haddle v. Garrison, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the judgement of the court of appeals and found that Mr. Haddle's at-will employment was a constitutionally protected property interest.  

Question 4 options:

	True
	False

 

Question 5 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, a plurality of the Court found that:

Question 5 options:

	Hamdi cannot be detained because he is an American citizen.
	A United States citizen cannot be an "enemy combatant."
	The military properly concluded that Hamdi was an enemy combatant.
	A citizen-detainee seeking to challenge his classification as an enemy combatant is entitled to notice, appointed counsel, and an opportunity to be heard.

 

Question 6 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Tolan v. Cotton, the Court stated that the following were genuine disputes.  Choose ALL that apply. 

Question 6 options:

	The lighting.
	Mr. Tolan's mother's demeanor.
	The position of Mr. Tolan's body when he was shot.
	The object in Mr. Tolan's hand.

 

Question 7 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Conley v. Gibson, the Court reversed the holding of the prior court and denied the Union's motion to dismiss because:

Question 7 options:

	Rule 8 only requires a short plain statement which puts the other party on notice.
	There was overwhelming evidence that the union failed to represent the African American members
	The respondent party knew what they were doing and did not need more notice as they were the party accused of the illegal action.
	All of the above

 

Question 8 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the United States Supreme Court determined that:

Question 8 options:

	Twombly's plausibility standard was too high a burden on the plaintiff and reaffirmed the holding in Conley.
	Twombly's plausibility standard applies to the case.
	Twombly's plausibility standard does not apply to enemy combatants.
	Ashcroft's motion for summary judgment was granted.

 

Use the following fact patterns for the next two questions.

 

Maria Gomez, a sixty-five year old Mexican-American woman, was an accountant in New York City who regularly received favorable evaluations during her twenty years with Kuaiji Incorporated. However, on February 15, 2018, Kuaiji CEO Sheldon Bannon told her that the company could no longer afford her high salary and that he had to fire her. Maria had long suspected that both Bannon and company Vice President Mike Stone had been critical of Mexican-Americans and supported the closing of the US border with Mexico. Furthermore, in March, Maria realized that Kuaiji had replaced her with a white male who had just graduated college with a degree in French literature. After thinking about it, she also realized that she was the only person at Kuaiji of Mexican-American heritage. Maria has come to your office alleging that she was fired due to her race.  After a detailed investigation into her claims, you decide to file suit in federal court.  Answer the following questions:

 

Question 9 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Which of the following requests for discovery is a judge most likely to deny:

Question 9 options:

	A copy of an email sent by Mike Stone containing a joke that portrays Mexican people badly.
	Copies of any emails sent by Sheldon Bannon regarding Maria's performance.
	The transcripts from any meetings where Bannon suggests the company "fire all the old people."
	A copy of the company's regulations regarding the process of hiring and firing employees.

 

Question 10 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You have requested to obtain a copy of every document produced in the last five years that makes any reference to a racial group.  Kuaiji has objected, claiming that the request is too broad and irrelevant to the case as a whole.  Using Robertson v. People Magazine, the judge will likely determine that:

Question 10 options:

	The growth of technology has made it so that producing such documents will not be burdensome for Kuaiji.  However, like the request in Robertson, such a request is irrelevant to the case.
	The request is irrelevant because it seeks information regarding all racial groups and not just Mexican-Americans.  Discovery requests must be narrow and only seek information that the attorney knows will be used in court.
	While granting such a request might burden Kuaiji, the relevance of the documents to the case outweighs any such burden.  The discussion of race at an accounting firm is different than the discussion of race by a committee deciding what articles to publish.
	The request cannot be granted, as such documents are protected by editorial privilege

 

Use the following fact patterns for the next two questions.

 

Imagine that a plaintiff sues a defendant.  The plaintiff claims that the defendant signed a promissory note guaranteeing payment in one month.  One month has passed and the plaintiff claims that the defendant has not paid him the money he is owed.  The plaintiff is suing the defendant for the money he is owed.  

 

Question 11 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 The defendant files a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.  The motion will be . . .

Question 11 options:

	Granted, because it is substantially likely that the plaintiff merely forgot he had been paid and made a mistake when he filed the lawsuit.
	Denied, because the defendant should want his day in court to prove he is innocent if he paid on the promissory note.
	Granted, because the plaintiff needed to provide evidence proving that the defendant failed to pay on the promissory note.
	Denied, because we are going to assume that the alleged facts (that the defendant failed to pay on the promissory note) are true.

 

Question 12 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When answering this question, continue to consider the facts set forth in the previous question.

Assume the disclosure and discovery yielded the promissory note itself, whose truth the defendant does not contest.  Assume also that the defendant answered questions under oath during the discovery phase of the proceedings.  In those answers, the defendant admitted to signing the promissory note and admitted that he did not repay the money.  The plaintiff files a Rule 56 motion for summary judgement.  The motion will be . . .

Question 12 options:

	Denied, because the jury can decide which facts are true and which facts are false.
	Denied, because the defendant could change his story at trial and admit that he lied under oath during the discovery phase of the trial.
	Granted, because summary judgment would prevent a futile trial where there are no genuine material facts in dispute.
	Granted, because the plaintiff's claims alone without any evidence would be enough for summary judgement.

 

Question 13 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Hispanic man is on trial for armed robbery and aggravated assault for a crime he allegedly committed at a store on Davis Monthan Air Force Base.  The prosecutor uses all of his peremptory strikes to dismiss all the Hispanic jurors. The defense attorney objects relying on Batson and makes a prima facie case.  The prosecutor responds with race neutral explanations.  The Judge should do which of the following:  Choose ALL the answers that are correct. 

Question 13 options:

	Trust her gut instinct and make a ruling becuase trial courts have a backlog of cases that need to be tried.
	Consider all the questions that were asked of the Hispanic jurors compared to the questions that were asked of the non-Hispanic jurors.
	Consider whether this prosecutor or this prosecutor's office have a history of this practice.
	Defer to the prosecutor's explanations.

 

Question 14 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What was the governing rule on which the Supreme Court relied in Batson?

Question 14 options:

	The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment prohibits purposeful racial discrimination in juror selection.
	The Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution prohibits any jury selection practice that tends to reduce the representation of racial minorities on a petit jury, even if that result is unintentional.
	The Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution prohibits the use of peremptory challenges in jury selection.
	The Due Process Clause of the Constitution requires appointment of counsel to indigent litigants when they are facing loss of physical liberty.

 

Question 15 (6.52 points)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In Bias v. Advantage International, Inc. the court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgement.  If you were the attorney for Len Bias' estate, what would you have done to better your client's chances of defeating the motion for summary judgement?

Question 15 options:

	Investigated and interviewed the "friends" who made statements against Bias to determine if they had issues with credibility or motive to lie.
	Get sworn and notarized affidavit of coach who never saw Bias use cocaine.
	Sought childhood friends of Bias who could testify that Bias never used cocaine in school.
	All of the above.