Thursday, October 9, 2008
Part 2: Labor Law
Today marks the beginning of part two of the course: Labor Law. For today's class, the reading discusses several sections of the National Labor Relations Act. I will provide handouts of some key sections in class today. The handout can also be accessed by clicking here.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Mid-Term Exam Instructions
Following are the exam instructions for the mid-term tomorrow. Please note, you will have these for the exam, but I wanted to provide them early in case you want to read them first.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR MID-TERM EXAMINATION
This is an open-book examination. You may use any materials you wish to bring, and you may take the exam on laptop if you have complied with the UND School of Law’s requirements. Other than the hard copies of materials you bring for the exam, you may not use a computer (other than for taking the exam), the Internet, or other electronic resources (unless otherwise authorized by the Dean’s office for specific accommodations). Thus, you must print out and bring to the exam anything you wish to access during the exam. The work on this exam must be solely your own. You must turn in this exam along with any scrap paper at the end of the exam.
You will have one and a half hours (90 minutes) to complete the examination, which consists of 3 essay questions. There are multiple portions of some of the questions; please answer each part. I have assumed 5 minutes to get the materials and get the exam started and 15 minutes for reading the materials. I then divided the remaining 70 minutes of the exam among the questions below. Please answer every question. You are better served answering every question, with a little less on each part, than missing an entire question. This exam provides the equivalent of 70 points, with the minutes alloted corresponding to the number of points available on each question.
Please note -- this exam is single-sided and is 3 total pages, including this cover sheet.
Please use only your exam number -- do not use your name, student ID number or Social Security Number on any exam materials.
This exam is to be your work, and your work alone. University and UND School of Law policies apply, including, but not limited to the School of Law’s Academic Dishonesty and Misconduct policy. By turning in this exam, you certify that the exam was completed only by you, without the aid of any materials not expressly authorized.
This exam covers the material we discussed in class. Relax (as best you can) and use the information from class to guide you to the correct answers. If you see any problems or inconsistencies, note them on the exam and move on.
NOTE: For this exam, please assume that all the cases we discussed are binding in the courts in the fictional state of Dakota. If the cases we have discussed conflict on a relevant issue, please treat both cases as lower Dakota court decisions, meaning that the Dakota Supreme Court would need to choose. Then explain why the court should adopt one case over the other. (You can simply say, e.g., “Indiana courts say X, but Ohio courts say Y; Dakota should pick X because . . . .”)
Good Luck!
A couple additional points for you to consider. First, don't worry about feeling a time crunch. I am asking for a lot of information, but I recognize that you could provide more information in 3 hours than 90 minutes. Please just do your best and answer every question.
Second, in my explanation for how to balance court decisions, I noted you could say, “Indiana courts say X, but Ohio courts say Y; Dakota should pick X because . . . .” That was just an example. You could also say, “Some courts say X, but other courts say Y; Dakota should pick X because . . . .” Saying which state or the case name is not critical -- A clear grasp of the content and understanding of the issues is what I am seeking.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR MID-TERM EXAMINATION
This is an open-book examination. You may use any materials you wish to bring, and you may take the exam on laptop if you have complied with the UND School of Law’s requirements. Other than the hard copies of materials you bring for the exam, you may not use a computer (other than for taking the exam), the Internet, or other electronic resources (unless otherwise authorized by the Dean’s office for specific accommodations). Thus, you must print out and bring to the exam anything you wish to access during the exam. The work on this exam must be solely your own. You must turn in this exam along with any scrap paper at the end of the exam.
You will have one and a half hours (90 minutes) to complete the examination, which consists of 3 essay questions. There are multiple portions of some of the questions; please answer each part. I have assumed 5 minutes to get the materials and get the exam started and 15 minutes for reading the materials. I then divided the remaining 70 minutes of the exam among the questions below. Please answer every question. You are better served answering every question, with a little less on each part, than missing an entire question. This exam provides the equivalent of 70 points, with the minutes alloted corresponding to the number of points available on each question.
Please note -- this exam is single-sided and is 3 total pages, including this cover sheet.
Please use only your exam number -- do not use your name, student ID number or Social Security Number on any exam materials.
This exam is to be your work, and your work alone. University and UND School of Law policies apply, including, but not limited to the School of Law’s Academic Dishonesty and Misconduct policy. By turning in this exam, you certify that the exam was completed only by you, without the aid of any materials not expressly authorized.
This exam covers the material we discussed in class. Relax (as best you can) and use the information from class to guide you to the correct answers. If you see any problems or inconsistencies, note them on the exam and move on.
NOTE: For this exam, please assume that all the cases we discussed are binding in the courts in the fictional state of Dakota. If the cases we have discussed conflict on a relevant issue, please treat both cases as lower Dakota court decisions, meaning that the Dakota Supreme Court would need to choose. Then explain why the court should adopt one case over the other. (You can simply say, e.g., “Indiana courts say X, but Ohio courts say Y; Dakota should pick X because . . . .”)
Good Luck!
A couple additional points for you to consider. First, don't worry about feeling a time crunch. I am asking for a lot of information, but I recognize that you could provide more information in 3 hours than 90 minutes. Please just do your best and answer every question.
Second, in my explanation for how to balance court decisions, I noted you could say, “Indiana courts say X, but Ohio courts say Y; Dakota should pick X because . . . .” That was just an example. You could also say, “Some courts say X, but other courts say Y; Dakota should pick X because . . . .” Saying which state or the case name is not critical -- A clear grasp of the content and understanding of the issues is what I am seeking.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Subjective or Objective?
In regards to the Invasion of Privacy tort, is the "reasonable person" element subjective or objective?
Professor's Response:
The test is objective, but not in the sense that every “reasonable person” would be offended by the disclosure. Rather, consider the Young case from the reading materials: “No doubt an objective test obtains. A person may not be held liable for public disclosure of facts about another unless he should reasonably have foreseen that the person would be likely offended.” Thus, the test is not whether the plaintiff deemed it highly offensive; however, the fact that some person might not find disclosure of the information offensive does not mean there is no case, either. That is, the test is whether the disclosure of the information disclosed would be deemed “objectionable or highly offensive to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities.”
The Young court notes that information about “one’s sexual organs and reproductive system” is clearly a private matter. “It may be the fact that many women who have undergone a hysterectomy do not keep that fact secret, but this is not the test.” As long as a reasonable person woman would consider the fact a private matter, and it is foreseeable that a reasonable person would consider it a private matter, it is sufficient to satisfy the offensive or objectionable prong.
Thus, in our case file, the question was whether the release of a person’s age is “objectionable or highly offensive to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities.” Note that if age disclosure is not deemed highly offensive or objectionable to a reasonable person, it does not mean there might not be some other claim, such as intentional or negligent inflection of emotional distress. However, such claims are beyond the scope of our course.
Professor's Response:
The test is objective, but not in the sense that every “reasonable person” would be offended by the disclosure. Rather, consider the Young case from the reading materials: “No doubt an objective test obtains. A person may not be held liable for public disclosure of facts about another unless he should reasonably have foreseen that the person would be likely offended.” Thus, the test is not whether the plaintiff deemed it highly offensive; however, the fact that some person might not find disclosure of the information offensive does not mean there is no case, either. That is, the test is whether the disclosure of the information disclosed would be deemed “objectionable or highly offensive to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities.”
The Young court notes that information about “one’s sexual organs and reproductive system” is clearly a private matter. “It may be the fact that many women who have undergone a hysterectomy do not keep that fact secret, but this is not the test.” As long as a reasonable person woman would consider the fact a private matter, and it is foreseeable that a reasonable person would consider it a private matter, it is sufficient to satisfy the offensive or objectionable prong.
Thus, in our case file, the question was whether the release of a person’s age is “objectionable or highly offensive to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities.” Note that if age disclosure is not deemed highly offensive or objectionable to a reasonable person, it does not mean there might not be some other claim, such as intentional or negligent inflection of emotional distress. However, such claims are beyond the scope of our course.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)