PLSC 311: Exam 1 Essay HYPOTHETICAL
(Spring 2018)
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
This exam is worth 20% of your course grade, and consists of two parts weighted equally (i.e. 10% each):
(1) a written portion consisting of an essay uploaded (as either an MS Word doc or PDF file) on Canvas by 12 midnight on 23.
HYPOTHETICAL-BASED ESSAY
For most of you, this type of essay will be unlike any you have ever seen. In teaching law, however, a “hypothetical-based” essay is the norm, even in other law courses taught at WWU (e.g. in the business school and Huxley College).
Read the hypothetical scenario below, then answer the question(s) that follow. You must take the facts, no matter how odd or unlikely they may seem, as they are given in the scenario. You may not change or make up additional facts. You may, however, make reasonable inferences from the facts based on common sense and experience, and include them in your analysis.
Walt, a citizen of Washington, was driving south on Interstate 5 from Bellingham, WA on a road trip to Disneyland in Anaheim, California. Passing through Oregon, he picked up his friend, Oliver, a citizen of California who was visiting his parents in Oregon. Walt had offered to drive Don home to Los Angeles, CA on his way to Anaheim.
For kicks, Walt and Don tried to switch seats without pulling off the highway. While pulling this stunt, they unintentionally swerved across the highway divider, and into oncoming traffic on the other side of the highway. Connor, a citizen of California, was driving on the same interstate highway headed in the opposite direction as Walt and Oliver. Their two cars collided head-on, causing serious injuries to all three persons. The accident took place in Oregon, and all three were taken to a nearby Oregon hospital to treat their injuries.
After recovering from his injuries, each person returned to his home state. Connor filed two lawsuits in California state court, one against Walt and the other against Oliver. Connor alleged that Walt and Oliver, as the result of their actions and pursuant to the tort laws of the state of California, were liable for his physical injuries, pain and suffering, and property damage to his car in the amount of $85,000, for which Connor seeks damages.
Assume there is a federal law, the Interstate Highway Safety Act, under which drivers who are injured in traffic accidents outside of their home state while driving on interstate highways may sue tortfeasors for compensation.
Instructions. Write an essay in which you answer these questions:
(1) Does the California state court have subject matter jurisdiction over Connor’s lawsuits? (Be sure to answer the question with respect to each of the lawsuits.)
(2) Could Connor have filed his lawsuits in federal court? (Stated another way, can a federal court obtain subject matter jurisdiction over each of Connor’s lawsuits?)
Organizing your essay. Divide your essay into two parts. For Part 1, your first sentence shall be, “YES [or NO], the California court has [or does not have] SMJ over C’s lawsuit against Walt.” (Then state your answer regarding C’s lawsuit against Oliver.) DO NOT write any other introductory sentences or paragraphs. Identify the legal issues, and apply the relevant law to the facts in the hypothetical. Finally, restate your answers to the first question (for each lawsuit).
Once you have finished Part 1, skip a line and begin Part 2. For Part 2, your first sentence shall be, “YES [or NO], Connor could have [or not have] filed in federal court his lawsuit against Walt.” (Then state your answer regarding C’s lawsuit against Oliver.) DO NOT write any other introductory sentences or paragraphs. Identify the legal issues, and apply the relevant law to the facts from the hypothetical. Finally, restate your answers to the second question (for each lawsuit).
DO NOT discuss the following: (1) the substantive merits of the case (i.e. who should win in the lawsuits); (2) outside sources of law not covered in the reading or in-class discussion (e.g. actual laws or other information found online); (3) anything unrelated to subject matter jurisdiction.
Abbreviations. You may use the following abbreviations in your essay: W(alt), O(liver), C(onnor), SMJ (subject matter jurisdiction), LJ (limited jurisdiction), GJ (general jurisdiction), AIC (amount in controversy), DJ (diversity jurisdiction), FQJ (federal question jurisdiction). You may also create your own non-standard abbreviations, within reason, by putting the abbreviation within parentheses after the first appearance of the word/phrase you wish to abbreviate: e.g. “Subject matter jurisdiction (SMJ) is required….”
SUBMISSION DETAILS
Late essays. Late essays will be penalized by 5% after the upload deadline, and another 5% for every 12 hours thereafter. This policy applies to all work that is graded out of 100 pts.
Early submission is allowed, but no extra credit will be given. Late essays must be BOTH emailed to the instructor AND ALSO uploaded on Canvas.
Collaboration. I encourage you to discuss your essay with others. Feel free to share ideas and arguments. However, your essay must be the product of your own individual written effort. While you may share and discuss ideas and arguments with others, the final product must be yours alone. Except for group essays, no two or more persons may submit the same or substantially similar work and claim that each of them wrote it, or that they wrote it together. (See Section VII of the syllabus for policies regarding academic honesty and plagiarism.) This policy applies to exams, homework assignments, and all other work submitted for a grade.
OTHER TECHNICAL MATTERS
Papers failing to conform to the guidelines below will be penalized.
Format. Your essay must not exceed 700 words. NOTE: group essays are allowed one page beyond this. There is a penalty equal to the percentage of words over the prescribed limit.
Do not write your name anywhere on your essay; it will be read anonymously. Your essay must be typed, SINGLE-spaced in 12-pt. Times font, with one-inch margins all around, paragraphs properly indented, and pages numbered and paper-clipped (NO STAPLES). Do not include a cover sheet.
Save-as these instructions, using this format for your doc’s file name: your last name, your W-ID no., EX1—e.g.: Chen W00123456 EX1 (use your own name and ID no.). (For group essays, each person in the group will upload the essay on Canvas, but each essay will have only one student’s info in the doc’s file name.) Then revise the header in your new doc to look like this below:
[your W-ID no.] PLSC 311 EX1 p. 2 of 3
Citing/quoting assigned readings. When referring to or quoting cases, put in parentheses the case name and the page number, e.g.: “The states have no legislative authority over foreign affairs” (Cronin, 125L) (125 is the page number where the language you are quoting appears; L signifies the left-hand column). You should abbreviate case names by using the plaintiff’s name only, as in the previous example, unless the plaintiff’s name is very common (e.g. United States).
When referring to or quoting other material we have read (e.g. Schubert), after your reference or quotation, insert e.g.: (Schubert, 140). If writing in a bluebook, simply write the author’s last name in parentheses; no need to cite a specific page.
Although you should incorporate into your essay relevant information from in-class discussion and/or the slides, DO NOT cite the slides or me. That is, DO NOT insert into your essay, e.g.: (Chen, 11/20/08 lecture) or (PLSC 313 Slides, Ch. 3).
Citing unassigned materials. If you want to cite outside sources or writers, i.e. besides those assigned in the reading for the course, please note: citing outside sources is neither required nor recommended. The course readings are intended to provide you with more than adequate information with which to construct your essay.
But if you choose to draw on outside material, you must properly cite it in a footnote, which means providing sufficient information so the reader can locate it. If it is an online source, you must include the complete URL address in a footnote, in addition to other standard information (e.g. author’s name, title and date of publication, and page number [if applicable] if you quote specific language). E.g. a footnote citing “NYT.com” by itself is an inadequate citation to an article in the New York Times. DO NOT include a bibliography with your essay.
GRADING CRITERIA FOR PLSC 311
Your essay will be graded based on the following criteria (not listed in order of importance):
(1) how well you identify the relevant issues that must be resolved, demonstrated by your citing the applicable laws;
(2) how well you argue your position by explicitly citing specific facts, precedents, and legal rules;
(3) how well you identify and address counter-arguments to your position;
(4) how well your essay is organized into a well-developed and coherent argument; and
(5) compliance with formatting requirements.
The paragraph below is taken from the course syllabus, and applies to the essay portion of the exam:
When grading the written portion of exams, I use a checklist of terms covering issues, facts, concepts, and other items that I think are relevant to the answer. (The checklist may be incorporated into a rubric.) Specific points are allocated to specific items. Therefore, the more items on the checklist that are discussed in your answer, the better your grade. I also give credit for items in your answer that do not appear on the checklist, if I think they are relevant. Because I do not penalize for including irrelevant material in your answer (although I do penalize for incorrect information), it is better to include more information in your answer than less, if you have not exceeded the word-count or page limit.
Caution: If you write substantially less than the word limit, you may have omitted key issues or facts from your discussion. You should not, however, discuss issues or facts that are not relevant to explaining or supporting your thesis or the example. You should articulate your thoughts as completely and as clearly as possible, and should provide as much detail and information in your discussion as is necessary to make your point completely and cogently. Do not assume that the reader either understands or agrees with your argument.
Grammar and spelling. You must write using proper English spelling, grammar, and usage. While infrequent instances of incorrect spelling, grammar, and usage will not be penalized, if their frequency demonstrates a lack of concern for following proper standards of writing, or a lack of care in taking the essays seriously, I may at my discretion impose a penalty.
Instructor’s use of students’ work. As the instructor, I may publicly display, distribute, or otherwise use students’ work for teaching purposes. Before doing so, I will remove or conceal to the best of my ability all identifying information about the author.
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR PLSC 311 ESSAYS
Suggestions on how to analyze the issues. In your essay, state completely and accurately any relevant law(s), including those found in cases, and support your conclusion by explicitly citing specific facts. DO NOT summarize the facts in the hypothetical in a separate paragraph (you are wasting space by merely restating the hypothetical). Instead, incorporate facts into your analysis. DO NOT write mere conclusions. Support your conclusions by explicitly citing specific facts, precedents, and laws. For examples of how to do this, reread the rationale in the cases we have read. One way to make sure that you are supporting your conclusions is by ending your sentences with “because,” and then giving reasons or facts to support your statement.
Completely analyze every relevant issue. Even if you have argued that one of two disjunctive requirements has been meet (i.e. where you only need to satisfy one of them to go forward with the case), or if you have argued that one of several conjunctive requirements has not been met (i.e. where you cannot proceed without having satisfied all of the several requirements), continue to analyze in your essay ALL of the remaining requirements or elements of a law. E.g., if you show in your analysis of diversity-based federal SMJ that one of the two prongs has not been met, continue to discuss the other prong, even though we already know that the requirements for SMJ cannot be met (because a required prong is missing).
Next, apply the law to the facts, after you have identified the legal issue(s) based on the relevant law(s) (i.e. those laws that are needed to resolve the legal issue[s]). If there are several prongs to satisfy a legal requirement or test, analyze each prong separately and in order. Read the facts carefully. Ask yourself: (1) Has a legal requirement been met or not? (2) Do some facts show that a requirement has been met, while other facts seem to show the opposite? Try to address possible counter-arguments to your position. The better essays will at least identify the weaknesses in their own position; the best essays will attempt to refute those weaknesses. (3) If there is legally significant language (look for quotation marks), whether from a statute or a case, analyze whether the facts show that any legal requirements have been met.
Reasoning by analogy is the primary form of argument used in law. Ask yourself: (1) Does the hypothetical have any similarities, in its facts or issues presented, with those in other cases we have read? (2) If so, how did the courts in those other cases resolve the issue(s)? (3) What facts did they look at? (4) What law(s), precedent, or other sources did they cite for guidance? (5) How might the court’s analysis provide guidance to analyzing the issues presented in the hypothetical? (Note: not all the cases that we read may be relevant to your argument. Further, some hypothetical scenarios may have no relationship whatever to cases we have read.)
Explain everything! You should articulate your thoughts as completely and as clearly as possible. Do not assume that the reader either understands or agrees with your argument. You should not, however, discuss issues or facts that are not relevant to explaining or supporting your conclusion. You should provide as much information as is necessary to make your point completely and cogently.
Be creative, but not implausibly creative. You may, and should, devise creative arguments to support your position. The more arguments you consider, the better your analysis—and your grade—will be. However, do not create implausible arguments—either to support your position or as possible counter-arguments to your position—that require stretching the imagination. You may, and should, think of arguments based on other facts that you can infer (based on common sense and experience) from the facts given in the hypothetical scenario.
Get to the point! Finally, because of the word or page limit, do not spend too much time or energy trying to make your writing rhetorically appealing. More important than making your writing sound nice is spotting the relevant law, issues, and facts, and analyzing them succinctly in your essay.
