Match number with terms below

This Report addresses the legal issues surrounding the injury that occurred in California and what Ron should expect to happen.This report will address the rules regarding the process to be followed, which are typically referred to as (1), and the later section of this memorandum will address the (2) which deal with the respective rights and obligations of the parties.The legal system we have in the United States is (3) borrowed in part from England.Our system differs from other legal systems such as those countries that follow the French System which is known as a (4).

The first question that comes to mind is whether Ron can be sued and forced to defend himself in New York?Obviously, Ron lives and is located in California, and the injury occurred in California.Hence, the first question is whether New York has (5), and that will be determined by what rules its legislature has made and whether New York enacted a (6).If New York has, then Ron may be sued in the state court of New York and be forced to defend himself; provided the person suing, which is an issue addressed later, can establish that Ron has sufficient (7) with New York because he once played football for a New York NFL football team or whether the court believes through his Wing Shop restaurants he has availed himself of (8) of doing business in New York because he is also a part owner of a Wing Shop in New York.

If he is sued in New York, he will need to be concerned about whether a New York State Court would be unduly sympathetic to a citizen of their state.For that reason, he should determine whether he can have a Federal Court hear the claim based upon the fact that he is a citizen of another state and (9) exists.If both New York and the Federal Court located in New York have the legal authority or power to hear this case, then (10) is said to exist.Another factor influencing what is the proper court in which to adjudicate this case is that the Federal Government has enacted a comprehensive statutory scheme covering food safety.It may be that after closely reviewing this new legislation the matter can only be heard in the Federal Court because it comprehensively legislated in this area, and (11) exists with the Federal Court.

Another question is who will actually be the person filing the lawsuit.This person is referred to as a (12).Will it be the injured child or his parents?Typically, the parents, as guardians, will sue on behalf of the child.Since Ron is being sued, he will be the (13).Regardless of the technical issue of who is the proper person to sue, this is a relatively sympathetic case and Ron may have considerable exposure due to sympathy considerations although he may have no legal culpability.Therefore, before proceeding to litigation, he should consider whether any type of (14) procedures are available.If so, Ron should try (15), because this will afford him the opportunity to see if the matter can be settled with the help of a (16) without having an adverse determination on the merits of the claim or lawsuit.Alternatively, if he wants to hear the dispute to a final determination outside of the court system, we may want to consider (17).This can either be (18), where the case is heard and decided by the arbitrator and the decision, called an (19), is a final decision enforceable by the court.On the other hand, Ron might want to choose (20), whereby if either side is unhappy with the resolution they can still seek to have the case heard in court.There are two major service providers who can provide these services.I have checked and the (21) which is the service provider that has a longer history than the other next mentioned has offices in New York.However, we might want to hire a retired judge from (22).

10 years

10%

absolute privilege

abstracts of judgment

alternative dispute resolution

American Arbitration Assoc.

arbitration

award

binding arbitration

bond or undertaking

cause of action

challenge for cause

civil law system

claim of relief

clerk's transcript

case law

common law system

complaint

concurrent jurisdiction

cross-complaint

cross-examination

default

default judgment calendar

defendant

deposition

direct examination

discovery

diversity of citizenship

due process

exclusive federal jurisdiction

interrogatories

JAMS

JNOV

judgment by default

jurisdiction

jury instructions

long arm statute

mediation

mediator

minimum contracts

motion for summary judgment

motions to exclude/in limine

non-binding arbitration

Notice of Appeal

opening statement

order of examination (OEX)

peremptory challenges

personal property lien

personal service

plaintiff

privileged

procedural rules

process server

qualified privilege

renewed

reporter's transcript

request to enter default

request to produce

service by publication

service of process

statute of limitations

statutes

subpoena

substantive

substantive rules

substituted service

summons

the rights and benefits

U.S. Constitution

verdict

voir dire

work product privilege

writs of execution