1. What is the Bill of Rights? Why is it important? List and discuss in detail four of the key protections afforded criminal defendants by the Bill of Rights. It is exceedingly important that you be specific in your answer.

2.

Aidan Shaw works for Bradshaw Furniture, a small family business owned and operated by Carrie Bradshaw. He is paid an hourly wage and is reimbursed for his work related expenses. Bradshaw Furniture sets his hours, provides him with training, and supplies him with tools and a place of work. Among his duties is the delivery of furniture to customers’ homes. He is authorized to use the company’s box truck to make these deliveries but is to return the truck after his deliveries have been completed. One morning, after delivering a chaise lounge to Samantha’s house, he stops at Mr. Big’s Burger Joint, to get lunch from the drive-through window. As he is leaving the parking lot, he spills his cola and accidentally hits the rear of Mr. Sanford’s parked car causing a bit of damage.

Sanford is so upset when he sees that his car was hit, he literally has a heart attack inside the restaurant. Clutching his chest, Sandford falls to the ground screaming, “I am coming Elizabeth” referring to his late wife. Two bystanders rush to his side to help. Sanford tells them he knows he is dying and wants to give “his last will and testament.” They both nod and encourage him to go on. He tells them he does not want any of his personal property to go to his son Lamont but rather to a friend, Rollo. Then he looks up to the sky and goes to meet his maker.

First, is Aidan an employee of Bradshaw Furniture or and independent contractor? Why? Who may be held liable for the accident, Aidan and/or Bradshaw Furniture, and under what legal doctrine? Would it matter if Aidan had completed all his deliveries for that day? Would there be any difference in the potential liability of Bradshaw if Aidan had the accident after driving 50 miles away to visit a friend after work?

Second, what about Mr. Sanford’s attempt at creating a will? Was he successful? If so, what type of will was created? As to Lamont, can he be cut out of his father’s will? Is there any special term that would apply to Lamont?

3.

Sally Salacious is a blogger in Jingletown U.S.A. In a rush to meet a deadline, she posts a story based solely upon rumor and innuendo about a clerk in the town’s tax department stating that “Jane Average embezzled funds from her employer, the Township of Jingletown U.S.A.” Sally never attempts to verify the allegations. The story goes viral and Jane is immediately fired. Although state law requires an investigation of these type of allegations to be conducted prior to termination, no such investigation was conducted. Rather, the head of Human Resources for the Township of Jingletown stated on the record that “an investigation of the allegations was not necessary” as he “wasn’t surprised Jane was embezzling from the town as of her kind are all crooks and thieves.”

First, what type of claim can Jane file against Sally? What are the elements of that claim? What defense, if any, might Sally be able to assert in her defense? Is Jane likely to prevail in court? Suppose Jane Average was not average but rather, was the mayor of Jingletown? How would that fact alter your analysis? Explain.

Second, what type of claim could Jane file against her employer? In what forum would she file it and would she likely prevail? federal jurisdiction would exist (what type of jurisdiction is present) and the public policy reasons for allowing individuals to bring suit in federal court.

4.

Wiley Coyote is the owner/operator Road Runner Construction, Inc. Road Runner Construction uses dynamite regularly in the course of its business. Last Tuesday, Mr. Coyote used dynamite to loosen a rocky hillside readying it for the installation of a new super highway. The blast from the dynamite could be heard and felt for several miles. It caused the foundation of the house owned by Elmer J. Fudd to crack. Mr. Fudd’s McMansion was located over a half a mile from the dynamite site. Mr. Coyote was careful when using the dynamite and no allegation of negligence is made. However, Mr. Fudd claims that Mr. Coyote and Road Runner Construction are liable for the damage to his house’s foundation and sues them. What kind of activity is Road Runner Construction and Mr. Coyote engaging in when using the dynamite? Is Mr. Fudd correct that the defendants can be held liable for the damage to his house? If so, under what legal doctrine? What public policy reasons support the applicable legal doctrine? Briefly explain your answer.