Reflecting over the short time you have spent in this class, please state two items from each module that you have learned and have come to appreciate due to this class. Please make sure that you elaborate as to why each of the items that you selected are important to you and how they will be useful in your lifetime. Please feel free to provide examples that you feel may help supplement and/or support your statements. Finally, please be sure to state which week's module you are referring to for each of your responses and that each week has its own paragraph, thereby making it easy for each of us to follow. Please note that failing to following these directions will result in receiving a major deduction. Thank you.

Modules given below with answers

Module 1

Washoe Medical Center, Inc., admitted Shirley Swisher for the treatment of a fractured pelvis. During her stay, Swisher suffered a fatal fall from her hospital bed. Gerald Parodi, the administrator of her estate, and others filed an action against Washoe seeking damages for the alleged lack of care in treating Swisher. During voir dire, when the plaintiffs' attorney returned a few minutes late from a break, the trial judge led the prospective jurors in a standing ovation. Later during voirdire,the judge joked with one of the prospective jurors, whom he had known in college, about his fitness to serve as a judge and personally endorsed another prospective juror's business. After the trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Washoe. The plaintiffs moved for a new trial, but the judge denied the motion. The plaintiffs then appealed, arguing that the tone set by the judge during voir dire prejudiced their right to a fair trial. Should the appellate court agree? Why or why not? Explain your position fullyand completely. Remember to support your reasoning with the law, and not mere opinion or beliefs.

Answer:The conduct of the trial judge was inappropriate and potentially prejudicial, and the case should be remanded for a new trial before a different judge. A trial judge is charged with providing order and decorum in trial proceedings. The average juror is a layman; the average layman defers with respect to the judge; and the jury is, as a rule, alert to any remark that will indicate favor or disfavor on the part of the judge. An opinion is often formed on circumstances that may appear insignificant, and the words of a judge can mold the opinion of the members of the jury to the extent that one or the other side of the controversy may be prejudiced or injured. The main issue in this case was the belittling of the plaintiff's attorney with the standing ovation. There is no conflict of interest with a judge knowing a potential juror, only a party to the case. Jurors are not a party to the case.

module 7

On January 1, Damon, for consideration received, orally promised to pay Gary $300 a month for as long as Gary lived, with the payments to be made on the first day of every month. Damon made the payments regularly for nine months and then decided to make no further payments. Gary claimed that Damon had breached the oral contract and sued Damon for damages. Damon contented that the contract was unenforceable because, under the Statute of Frauds, contracts that cannot be performed within one year must be in writing. Fully discuss whether Damon will succeed in this defense.

Answer:Only oral contracts that areimpossibleto perform within one-year fallunderthe Statute of Frauds. However unlikely it may be that Gary will die within a year; thepossibilitydoes exist. Therefore, the contract does not fallunderthe Statute of Frauds and is enforceable. The time to determine when something can be fully performed, even if remotely possible, is at the time the contract is formed. Therefore, even if Damon made 13 consecutive monthly payments to Gary, and then decided to stop, the oral contract would still be enforceable, since the Statue of Frauds would not apply. Again, this is because at the start of the agreement it was possible for Gary to die within the year.