Submission Instructions:

The answers to both WALA problems should be combined into one document.  Further, the document must be saved either in Word or PDF format.  This document would then be submitted by the due date listed and in the link provided below.

Failure to comply with these submission instructions could cause you not to receive any credit for this homework.

( Note: If you use quotations in your answer, you may use either APA or MLA citation methods.)

WALA # 1

This type of assignment will provide you with an opportunity to act like a judge.  You will be given a factual scenario that forms a basis for a legal dispute between two or more people.  This will be followed by two questions you will need to answer.  The first will always ask you to summarize the law that underlies the dispute, and the second will ask you to analyze the facts and reach conclusion on the dispute.  I will always provide you with the page number in the e-textbook where the law can be located.

Factual Scenario:

Bill entered into a contract with Ron to build a house in Fresno.  The total cost under the contract for Bill was $500,000, and Bill made an initial payment to Ron, upon signing, of $100,000.  However, before construction began, Bill was unable to get certain permits issued by the City of Fresno and so decided not to move forward with construction.  He notified Ron and then demanded the return of the $100,000.  Ron refused, claiming the $100,000 payment was non-refundable under the contract.  In response, Bill hired an attorney who filed a lawsuit against Ron in Fresno County Superior Court (the highest trial court in Fresno County, in the California court system) asking for damages of $100,000 due to the breach of the contract.

While Bill is a resident of Fresno, Ron's construction business and his residence are in Reno Nevada.  Despite that, the contract was entered into in Fresno and states that California law would be applied in any dispute over the contract. 

Ron hired an attorney in Fresno, and that attorney immediately sought an order from a federal judge to transfer the case from Fresno County Superior Court to the federal court in downtown Fresno.  This was done through a procedure called a motion, and if Ron's attorney is successful the federal court would then handle the case from then on.  In the motion, Ron's attorney argues that the legal basis for the transfer is an area of law called  diversity jurisdiction .  

You are the federal judge hearing this motion, and you must decide whether diversity jurisdiction applies, and therefore, whether the case should be transferred to the federal court in downtown Fresno.  

Questions:

1. Fully summarize the law related to diversity jurisdiction in federal court (a review of diversity jurisdiction is located on page 45 of the e-textbook).

2. Analyze the facts in the factual scenario and decide if the requirements for diversity jurisdiction have been met.  In your answer to this question, it is not enough to simply say whether they have been met or not.  You must provide specific reasons based on the facts for your ruling. (For further help in answering this question, the video above reviews how to answer it.)

WALA # 2

Factual Scenario

David and Carol Smith, through a Phoenix, Arizona, travel agent, purchased passage for a 7-day cruise on the Happy-People Cruise Ship, Tropicale.  They paid the fare to the agent, who forwarded it to Happy-People’s headquarters in Miami, Florida.  The cruise line then prepared the tickets and sent them to the Smiths in the State of Arizona.  The tickets contained two provisions: (1) that acceptance of the tickets would create a contract between Happy-People and the Smiths, and  (2) there was a forum selection clause requiring any dispute arising from the cruise to be litigated in the state of Florida,  The Smiths accepted the tickets and later boarded the Tropicale in Los Angeles, California.   The ship sailed to Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, and then returned to Los Angeles.  While the ship was in international waters off the Mexican coast, Carol Smith was injured when she slipped on a deck mat during a guided tour of the ship's galley.  When the Smiths returned home they filed a lawsuit against the Happy-People Cruise Line in the United States District Court in Phoenix, Arizona.  Their claim is that Carol Smith's injuries were the result of the negligence of the employees of Happy-People.  The cruise line moved to transfer the case to the United States District Court in Miami Florida.  Their basis for the motion to transfer was the forum selection clause in the ticket. 

You are the judge in the federal court in Phoenix hearing the motion, and you must decide whether the forum selection clause gives Happy-People Cruise Line the right to have the case transferred to Miami.  

Questions:

1. Fully summarize the law related to forum selection clauses in contracts and their enforceability.  This law is discussed on pages 49 through 51 of the e-textbook, and specifically, review the case of Atlantic Marine Construction Co. v. U.S. District Court on pages 49 and 50 of the e-textbook.  If you wish to review additional sources you can do an Internet search for the case of  Carnival Cruise Line vs. The Shutes, 499 U.S. 585 (1991).

2. Analyze the facts in the factual scenario and decide if the motion to transfer should be granted based on the law you reviewed under question 1 above.   Again, in your answer to this question, it is not enough to simply say whether they have been met or not.  You must provide specific reasons based on the facts for your ruling.