DQ10-11: First-in-Time Type of Rule. –For Determining Property Rights in Unowned Property More Than One Possible First-in-Time Rule.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Civil & criminal law Civil Law.
Advertisements

How to Brief a Case Hawkins v. McGee.
The Process of Litigation. What is the first stage in a civil lawsuit ?  Service of Process (the summons)
When might conforming to custom be a bad idea? (Includes…)
Chapter 16 Lesson 1 Civil and Criminal Law.
MUSIC: The Beatles MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR (1967) §B Lunch Wed Sep 10 Meet on 12:15pm Gil * McLaughlin Martinez * Morales Pope * Randolph * Rose.
MUSIC: Paul Winter Canyon (1985) STATUS OF GRADING: Practice Midterms: Ready for Pick-Up Next: Assignment #1 Target Date: Nov. 6.
LAW for Business and Personal Use © 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned, copied or duplicated, or posted to a publicly accessible.
MUSIC: Beethoven Violin Sonatas #5 (1801) & #9 (1803) Recordings: Itzhak Perlman, Violin & Vladimir Ashkenazy, Piano ( )
MUSIC: Gustav Holst, The Planets ( ) London Philharmonia Orchestra (1996) conductOR: Leonard Slatkin.
From the Courtroom to the Classroom: Learning About Law © 2003 Constitutional Rights Foundation, Los Angeles, CA All rights reserved.
Ludwig van Beethoven Symphony #3 “Eroica” (1804) Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra Karl Bohm, Conductor Recorded 1972.
Ian Whitcomb, Titanic: Music as Heard on the Fateful Voyage.
Music: Beethoven String Quartet opus 131 (1826) Vienna Philharmonic Leonard Bernstein, Conductor Recorded 1977.
MUSIC: CLAUDE DEBUSSY Afternoon of a Faun (1894); Nocturnes (1900); The Sea (1905); Images D’Orchestre ( ) Boston Symphony Orchestra conductOR: CHARLES.
“Romantic Russia” London Symphony Orchestra (recorded 1956, 1966) Music: Mid- to Late 19 th Century Oxygen Brief #1: Available for Pick-Up Krypton Brief.
ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #5 Friday, August 28, 2015.
MUSIC: SERGEI PROKOFIEV, PETER & THE WOLF (1936) PHILADELPHIA Orchestra (1977) conductOR: EUGENE ORMANDY NARRATOR: DAVID BOWIE.
Music: Schumann, Piano Concerto in A Minor (1949) Grieg, Piano Concerto in A Minor (1872) Bavarian Radio Symphony Orchestra (2004) Conductor: Sir Colin.
Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. STATE FARM v. CAMPBELL 538 U.S. 408 (2003) Case Brief.
MUSIC: CLAUDE DEBUSSY, Afternoon of a Faun (1894); Nocturnes (1900); The Sea (1905) ORCHESTRE de la Suisse Romande (1988/1990) conductOR: ARMIN JORDAN.
Music: Uncle Bonsai A Lonely Grain Of Corn (1984) FYI: See Song Called Day Old Whale.
CASE BRIEF = RESUME Standardized Information Range of Successful Ways to Present Alter for Different Audiences Rarely the Whole Story.
HOW TO BRIEF A CASE The Structure of Case Briefs.
ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #8 (Extendo-Class) Friday, September 4, 2015.
ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #7 Wednesday, September 2, 2015.
NEON & HELIUM: Put Taber & Bartlett Briefs Face Down in Box on Front Table MUSIC: Ray Charles & Friends Genius Loves Company (Duets 2004) DOG = KATIE (15)
(Last Day of Ludwig) MUSIC: Beethoven (Last Day of Ludwig) Symphonies #4 (1807) & #7 (1813) Recordings: Chamber Orchestra of Europe Nikolaus Harmoncourt,
Music: Beethoven, Piano Sonata #23 (Appassionata) (1805) Performer: Emil Giles, Piano (1972) LUNCH TUESDAY 1. FOXHOVEN 2. GALLO 3. KINZER 4. MELIA 5. RAINES.
Music: The Beatles, Magical Mystery Tour (1967) (on one speaker  ) Written Briefs Due: HELIUM : Monday 9/15 (Mullett) CHLORINE : Wednesday 9/17 (Manning)
MUSIC: Granados, Spanish Dances (1890s) Alicia de Larrocha, Piano (1994) LUNCH 12:05 1. Fitzmartin 2. Gibbs 3. Isenstein 4. Kane 5. Mackesey 6.
ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.
ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #11 Wednesday, September 16, 2015.
MUSIC: BEETHOVEN Symphony #5 ( ) (rec. 1975) Symphony #7 (1811) (rec. 1976) Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra, Carlos Kleiber, Conductor.
Unit 3 Seminar.  You receive points for discussion board posts. You should make sure that responses are made at least three days during the unit (Wednesday.
MUSIC: Paul Winter Canyon (1985). LOGISTICS Lessons from Assignment #1 Follow Directions!!! Accuracy with Facts Accuracy with Cases Explain/Defend Conclusions.
Civil Law U.S. Government Chapter 15 Section 2.  Why would someone bring a lawsuit against another person, a business, or an organization? List 2-3 reasons.
Transition: Pierson  Liesner Trying to Identify “Magic Moment” When Object Changes from Unowned to Property.
MuSIC: Holst, The Planets ( ) & Williams, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS/STAR WARS (1977) Los ANGELES PhilharmoniC Orchestra Conductor: ZUBEN MEHTA (1998) §B Seating.
ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #9 Wednesday, September 9, 2015 (#9 = 9/9)
Ludwig van Beethoven Piano Sonata #23 (1805) “Appassionata” Emil Giles, Piano (1972)
Beethoven Cello Sonata #3 ( ) Jacqueline du Pré, Cello Daniel Barenboim, Piano Edinburgh Festival (1970)
Gustav Holst, The Planets (1914) Recorded by Philharmonia Orchestra (1996) Monday 80 Minutes: –Finish Liesner –Start State v. Shaw –Krypton Written Shaw.
CASE BRIEF = RESUME Standardized Information Range of Successful Ways to Present Alter for Different Audiences Rarely the Whole Story.
MUSIC: Beethoven Symphonies #6 (1808) & #8 (1814) Recordings: Chamber Orchestra of Europe Nikolaus Harmoncourt, Conductor (1991) See Whiteboard for Instructions.
ELEMENTS D1 & D POWER POINT SLIDES
ELEMENTS B1 & B2 POWER POINT SLIDES
ELEMENTS D1 & D POWER POINT SLIDES
ELEMENTS B1 & B2 POWER POINT SLIDES
ELEMENTS B1 & B2 POWER POINT SLIDES
ELEMENTS B1 & B2 POWER POINT SLIDES
ESSENTIAL QUESTION Why does conflict develop?
ELEMENTS B1 & B POWER POINT SLIDES
ELEMENTS B1 & B POWER POINT SLIDES
ELEMENTS B1 & B POWER POINT SLIDES
ELEMENTS B1 & B POWER POINT SLIDES
ELEMENTS D1 & D POWER POINT SLIDES
ELEMENTS D1 & D POWER POINT SLIDES
ELEMENTS D1 & D POWER POINT SLIDES
Civil Law U.S. Government Chapter 15 Section 2.
ALUMINUM: Written Swift Brief Due Wed
ELEMENTS D2 & D POWER POINT SLIDES
Balter; Granda; Hansen; Layug; Miller-Ciempela; Price; Wolfson
Courtroom to Classroom:
Business Law Final Exam
ELEMENTS B 2019 POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6: Friday August 23 National Ride the Wind Day National Sponge Cake Day.
ELEMENTS B 2019 POWER POINT SLIDES
Is Because “Just”? WHY? BECAUSE
Presentation transcript:

DQ10-11: First-in-Time Type of Rule. –For Determining Property Rights in Unowned Property More Than One Possible First-in-Time Rule

DQ10-11: First-in-Time Type of Rule. –For Determining Property Rights in Unowned Property –Different From, e.g., Most Deserving Gets Lottery (Winner Randomly Selected Auction (Highest Bidder Gets) More Than One Possible First-in-Time Rule

DQ10-11: First-in-Time Type of Rule More Than One Possible First-in-Time Rule –Pierson opinions agree on First-in-Time –Disagree on what has to be done first: 1 st Hot Pursuit v. 1 st Something More

DQ10-11: First-in-Time Type of Rule More Than One Possible First-in-Time Rule –Pierson opinions agree on First-in-Time –Disagree on what has to be done first –Possible Options After Majority Opinion: First Physical Possession First Wound First Mortal Wound

DQ10-11: First-in-Time: Likely Winners & Losers CAPTURING ANIMALS?

DQ10-11: First-in-Time: Likely Winners & Losers PARKING AT LAW SCHOOL?

DQ10-11: First-in-Time: Alternatives CAPTURING ANIMALS?

DQ10-11: First-in-Time: Alternatives PARKING AT LAW SCHOOL?

Brief Return to DQ8 What rule would you want if you were trying to preserve the fox population because foxes are commercially valuable?

Brief Return to DQ8 What rule would you want if you were trying to preserve the fox population because foxes are commercially valuable? We’ll return to this question with Demsetz article next week.

Choosing Among Property Allocation Systems Relevant Considerations: –Administrative Costs –Likely Winners & Losers –Effects on Participants’ Behavior

Choosing Among Property Allocation Systems Pros & Cons of First-in-Time Rules: Likely Benefits –Often Reasonable Degree of Certainty –Ease of Administration

Choosing Among Property Allocation Systems Pros & Cons of First-in-Time Rules: Likely Benefits –Often Reasonable Degree of Certainty –Ease of Administration Possible Problems –Can Seem Arbitrary –May Reward Undesirable Attributes

Choosing Among Property Allocation Systems We’ll Return to This Issue in Unit II

WHAT TO TAKE FROM PIERSON Intro to Info Found in/Relevant to Cases Some primarily to introduce you to system Some will be tools used regularly in course Anything you “need to know”, we come back to repeatedly

WHAT TO TAKE FROM PIERSON Intro to Info Found in/Relevant to Cases Context Language Social Policies Underlying Assumptions

WHAT TO TAKE FROM PIERSON Intro to Info Found in/Relevant to Cases Context –History of Dispute & Court Proceedings –Prior Legal Authority –Customs & Other Social Institutions –Historical Moment Language Social Policies Underlying Assumptions

WHAT TO TAKE FROM PIERSON Intro to Info Found in/Relevant to Cases Context Language –Difficulty Discerning Precise Holding –Rationales Social Policies Underlying Assumptions

WHAT TO TAKE FROM PIERSON Intro to Info Found in/Relevant to Cases Context Language Social Policies –Reward Useful Labor –Get Certainty (In Tension w Flexibility) –Achieve Economic Benefits Underlying Assumptions

WHAT TO TAKE FROM PIERSON Intro to Info Found in/Relevant to Cases Context Language Social Policies Underlying Assumptions –Irrelevance of Bad Intent –Use of Some Form of First-in-Time

ANNOUNCEMENTS 1 st Written Briefing Assignment Due Friday (Shaw) Follow Directions Carefully LUNCH TOMORROW 12:05 on Bricks: Caballero; Collett; Darville; Goldstein; Kapai; Rosenberg; Stone

GET A NON-ELECTRONIC LANDLINE PHONE

Transition: Pierson  Liesner Trying to Identify “Magic Moment” When Object Changes from Unowned to Someone’s Property

Transition: Pierson  Liesner Trying to Identify “Magic Moment” When Object Changes from Unowned to Property Fights Between 1 st & 2d Hunter: –If Object Unowned, no Q that 2d Hunter Wins –Issue: Had 1 st Hunter Done Enough to Get Property Rights Before Intervention

Transition: Pierson  Liesner Trying to Identify “Magic Moment” When Object Changes from Unowned to Property Fights Between 1 st & 2d Hunter: –If Object Unowned, no Q that 2d Hunter Wins –Issue: Had 1 st Hunter Done Enough to Get Property Rts Before Intervention Legal Rules Here Temporal Not Comparative

Transition: Pierson  Liesner Pierson Suggests Two Ways Besides Actual Physical Possession to get Property rights in Wild Animals :

Transition: Pierson  Liesner Pierson Suggests Two Ways Besides Actual Physical Possession to get Property Rights in Wild Animals : 1.MORTAL WOUNDING (Liesner) 2.NETS & TRAPS (Shaw)

LIESNER CONTEXT: 1914

1914: DEATHS Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain (Civil War Hero) John Muir (Naturalist) Jacob Riis (Journalist/Author) 19 th Century Industrialists –CW Post (Grape Nuts & Other Cereals) –George Westinghouse (Railroad Brake and Electronics) –Frederik Weyerhauser (Timber & Paper)

1914: BIRTHS Alec Guiness Bert Parks Joe Louis Joe DiMaggio Ralph Ellison Howard K. Smith

1914: Introduced in US: term “Birth Control” (coined by Margaret Sanger) First Blood Transfusion Doublemint chewing gum Elastic Brassiere Federal Trade Commission Co. that will become Greyhound Bus Mother’s Day (by Congr. Resolution)

1914: Introduced in US: New Republic Magazine Panama Canal Pygmalion by GB Shaw Rookie Pitcher: Babe Ruth Tarzan of the Apes Teletype Machine Traffic Lights using red-green signals

1914: World War I: Sept. 5: 1 st Battle of the Marne Begins NE of Paris, French 6 th Army Attacks Germans  Allied Victory

1914: World War I: Sept. 5: 1 st Battle of the Marne Begins NE of Paris, French 6 th Army Attacks Germans  Allied Victory Two Million Soldiers Participate

1914: World War I: Sept. 5: 1 st Battle of the Marne Begins NE of Paris, French 6 th Army Attacks Germans  Allied Victory Two Million Soldiers Participate 500,000 Killed or Wounded

1914: World War I: Dec : Christmas Truce

1914: World War I: June 28: Archduke Francis-Ferdinand Assassinated in Sarajevo: The Shot Heard Round the World

Liesner Brief: HELIUM STATEMENT OF THE CASE: Who is Suing Whom?

Liesner Brief: HELIUM STATEMENT OF THE CASE: Two hunters (Liesner and another) who mortally wounded a wolf sued a third hunter (Wanie) who subsequently shot and took the wolf … SEEKING WHAT RELIEF?

Liesner Brief: HELIUM STATEMENT OF THE CASE: Two hunters (Liesner and another) who claim to have shot and mortally wounded a wolf sued a third hunter (Wanie) who subsequently shot and took the wolf … SEEKING WHAT RELIEF? “to recover the body of the wolf” initially; (damages raised later in case)

Liesner Brief: HELIUM STATEMENT OF THE CASE: Two hunters (Liesner and another) who claim to have shot and mortally wounded a wolf sued a third hunter (Wanie) who subsequently shot and took the wolf seeking to recover the body of the wolf. ON WHAT LEGAL THEORY? (UNSTATED)

Liesner Brief: HELIUM ON WHAT LEGAL THEORY? (UNSTATED) might be “Trespass” or “Trespass on the Case” might be “Replevin” = Common law action for return of goods improperly taken

Liesner Brief: HELIUM PROCEDURAL POSTURE?

Liesner Brief: HELIUM PROCEDURAL POSTURE? Trial court directed verdict for plaintiff and awarded damages. Defendant appealed.

Liesner Brief: HELIUM FACTS (from TRIAL COURT) 1.Ps mortally wounded animal, pursued 2.Escape Improbable, if not impossible 3.D then shot & killed, took animal

KRYPTON DQ13: Application of Pierson to Facts of Liesner ASSUME TRIAL COURT FACTS CORRECT: 1.Ps mortally wounded animal, pursued 2.Escape Improbable, if not impossible 3.D then shot & killed, took animal WHY DO THIS?

Krypton DQ13: Application of Pierson to Facts of Liesner ASSUME TRIAL COURT FACTS CORRECT: 1.Ps mortally wounded animal, pursued 2.Escape Improbable, if not impossible 3.D then shot & killed, took animal APPLY LANGUAGE FROM PIERSON

Krypton DQ13: Application of Pierson to Facts of Liesner ASSUME TRIAL COURT FACTS CORRECT: 1.Ps mortally wounded animal, pursued 2.Escape Improbable, if not impossible 3.D then shot & killed, took animal APPLY POLICIES FROM PIERSON: Reward Effective Labor

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS: Motions to end the case. (“Dispose of” case  “Dispositive”)

DIRECTED VERDICT Trial Court Rules That Insufficient Evidence to Meet Relevant Legal Standard Was Presented to the Jury

DIRECTED VERDICT Trial Court Rules That Insufficient Evidence to Meet Relevant Legal Standard Was Presented to the Jury Two Possible Grounds for Appeal –Trial Court Applied Wrong Legal Standard –Evidence Was Sufficient to Meet Legal Standard

DIRECTED VERDICT: LIESNER Last Time: D Conceded Relevant Legal Standards, So Must Be Claiming That Evidence Sufficient to Raise Jury Q

DIRECTED VERDICT: LIESNER Unusual Case: Directed Verdict for Plaintiff Trial Record appears to contain factual disputes Trial Court must have believed that undisputed evidence proved P’s case