please answer 4-1, 4-2, and 4-5

4-1. STANDING. Jack and Maggie Turton bought a house in Jefferson County, Idaho, located directly across the street from a gravel pit. A few years later, the county converted the pit to a landfill. The landfill accepted many kinds of trash that cause harm to the environment, including major appliances, animal carcasses, containers with hazardous content warnings, leaking car batteries, and waste oil. The Turtons complained to the county, but the county did nothing. The Turtons then filed a lawsuit against the county alleging violations of federal environmental laws pertaining to groundwater contamination and other pollution. Do the Turtons have standing to sue? Why or why not? (See Basic Judicial Requirements.) 4-2. VENUE. Brandy Austin used powdered infant formula manufactured by Nestl USA, Inc., to feed her infant daughter. Austin claimed that a can of the formula was contaminated with Enterobacter sakazakii bacteria, causing severe injury to the infant. The bacteria can cause infections of the bloodstream and central nervous system-in particular, meningitis (inflammation of the tissue surrounding the brain or spinal cord). Austin filed an action against Nestl in Hennepin County District Court in Minnesota. Nestl argued for a change of venue because the alleged harm had occurred in South Carolina. Austin is a South Carolina resident and had given birth to her daughter in that state. Should the case be transferred to a South Carolina venue? Why or why not? [Austin v. Nestl USA, Inc., 677 F.Supp.2d 1134 (D.Minn. 2009)] (See Basic Judicial Requirements.) 4-5. MINIMUM CONTACTS. Seal Polymer Industries sold two freight containers of latex gloves to Med-Express, Inc., a company based in North Carolina. When Med-Express failed to pay the $104,000 owed for the gloves, Seal Polymer sued in an Illinois court and obtained a judgment against Med-Express. Med-Express argued that it did not have minimum contacts with Illinois because it was incorporated under North Carolina law and had its principal place of business in North Carolina. Therefore, the Illinois judgment based on personal jurisdiction was invalid. Was this argument alone sufficient to prevent the Illinois judgment from being collected against Med-Express in North Carolina? Why or why not? [Seal Polymer Industries v. Med-Express, Inc., 218 N.C.App. 447, 725 S.E.2d 5 (2012)] (See Basic Judicial Requirements.)