WPCKN ? B'R-)[rjI6 k>(j=ƒaHLhj=Y,fl?#j\mR8i8(#(3Z2Mv x[oJLk&G0x6N_аfʤwxb);\Zǝ+ק\CKHhu~'6pB|sH8hw <\ZO1֑g?GvJMIu% kG|Xmki)G$4߷K1] m1oY'# > ~rVz;?OTxʥ` *xUf F`kXf̀Np^Vx#$?? 3TQǶMErtK;jפexq9f@RnI)&)bjg#We2gNjEo1+Bw鹝5G#8U%N %G 0:M^ w4 mU4UO> 1uE 72 0c 0O 0= 0( 0 0 0" 0 0 0 0o 0U 0; 0! 0 0 0! 0" 0# 0W$ 03% 0 & 0& 0' 0( 0R) 0* 0* 0+ 0, 0Z- 0/. 0/ 0/ 00 0e1 0+2 0<2 0H*3U6H4~4N4 0 4 0?5 05 0._6 07 08 048 09 0: 0; 0< 0= 0> 0? 0@ 0sA 0YB 0WC 0RD 0JE 0?F 01G 0 H 0 I 0I 7J 1eJ 7NKUB\KbdKKLU@LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL 0 &XLXL 0h~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M~M 1eMHP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL$,,,,$0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,ԋ/ sU-:i+003|x$U\  `Calisto MT\  `&Times New Roman3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a) i)(;3$2#  0  .3  0  2G+J 0_level1  X /%4 4 <DL/23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2D+J 0_level2   ," <DL,23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2A+J 0_level3   ) <DL)23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2>+J 0_level4  ` &<<DL&23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2;+J 0_level5   #DL#23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  4MM 2_levnl17  , 5+ 4 <DL!523   5+ 4 <DL!5  4MM 2_levnl27  X 5+4 4 <DL!523   5+ 4 <DL!5  4MM 2_levnl37   5+` 4 <DL!523   5+ 4 <DL!5  4MM 2_levnl47   5+ 4 <DL!523   5+ 4 <DL!5  4MM 2_levnl57   5+ 4 <DL!523   5+ 4 <DL!5  4MM 2_levnl67   5+ 4 <DL!523   5+ 4 <DL!5  4MM 2_levnl77  4 5+ 4 <DL!523   5+ 4 <DL!5  4MM 2_levnl87  ` 5+< 4 <DL!523   5+ 4 <DL!5  4MM 2_levnl97   5+h 4 <DL!523   5+ 4 <DL!5  28+J 0_level6    DL 23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  25+J 0_level7  h DDL23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  22+J 0_level8   L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2/+J 0_level9    L23  ..  2( 4 <DL2  2GJ 0_levsl1  X /%4 4 <DL/23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2DJ 0_levsl2   ," <DL,23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2AJ 0_levsl3   ) <DL)23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2>J 0_levsl4  ` &<<DL&23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2;J 0_levsl5   #DL#23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  28J 0_levsl6    DL 23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  25J 0_levsl7  h DDL23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  22J 0_levsl8   L23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2/J 0_levsl9    L23  Ԁ  2( 4 <DL2  2GJ 0_levnl1  X /%4 4 <DL/23   2( 4 <DL2  2DJ 0_levnl2   ," <DL,23   2( 4 <DL2  2AJ 0_levnl3   ) <DL)23   2( 4 <DL2  2>J 0_levnl4  ` &<<DL&23   2( 4 <DL2  2;J 0_levnl5   #DL#23   2( 4 <DL2  28J 0_levnl6    DL 23   2( 4 <DL2  25J 0_levnl7  h DDL23   2( 4 <DL2  22J 0_levnl8   L23   2( 4 <DL2  2/J 0_levnl9    L23   2( 4 <DL2  <:Default Para8ow6Plain Text  K6<6X9`(Courier NewKXXXS \  `&Times New RomanS  <6X9`(Courier New 6B 24heading 1    XXX       XXX2//0TxBr_c1    XXX    XXX2//0TxBr_c2    XXX    XXX2~~0TxBr_p3     5+ {4 <DL5XXX    5+ {4 <DL5  XXX(//&c1    XXX    XXX2//0TxBr_c7    XXX    XXX20TxBr_p9     8.E]` hp x 8XXX    8.E]` hp x 8  XXX<J+M :Outline001_1  X 2( ` hp x 223  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <G+M :Outline001_2   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <D+M :Outline001_3 j  ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5 j <A+M :Outline001_4  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <>+M :Outline001_5   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <;+M :Outline001_6 j  #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5 j <8+M :Outline001_7  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <5+M :Outline001_8   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <2+M :Outline001_9 j   x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5 j <J+M :Outline002_1  X 2( ` hp x 223  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <G+M :Outline002_2   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <D+M :Outline002_3 j  ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5 j <A+M :Outline002_4  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <>+M :Outline002_5   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <;+M :Outline002_6 j  #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5 j <8+M :Outline002_7  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <5+M :Outline002_8   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  <2+M :Outline002_9 j   x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5 j Hi.IJKLMNOP 35;AGMSY_21.a.i.1.a.i.1.a.SQi.\  `*Times New RomanTTQuestions and Representative Answers Page of &   (9 Z(Times New Roman <pz :WP9_Heading   XXXI \  `Calisto MTI   XXXS \  `&Times New RomanS 6 4WP9_Title         35;AGMSY_11.a.i.1.a.i.1.a. !USUS.,  _ 8|XXdd8VXh@JULY2003BAREXAMINATION  @ QUESTIONSANDREPRESENTATIVEGOODANSWERS     `     h    X|XXX@%QUESTION1  `     ReelDeal,Inc.isamanufactureroffishingequipmentandsupplieslocatedinAnnapolis, 8  Maryland.ReelDealhasastellarreputationandhasbeenveryprofitableoverthepastyearsandhas $ t alwaysmadetimelypaymentsonitsloans.CatchAllProducts,Inc.isanothermanufacturerof  ` fishingequipmentandsupplieslocatedinOceanCity,Maryland.CatchAllhasbeenexperiencing  L  somefinancialdifficulties.  8    BillyRayisanofficerwithEarlGordon&Blair,Inc.( EGB),afinancialmanagement   companythatbothCatchAllandReelDealuse.BillyRayisresponsibleforadvisingclientsontheir   financialmattersincludingthefinancialfeasibilityofbusinesstransactions.EGBhasarelationship   withNationalBank.UnknowntoanyofEGBscustomers,NationalBankpaysBillyRayafeefor   anyloanshereferstoNationalBank. p   Aspartofoneofhisregularconsultations,BillyRayurgesReelDealtoexpanditscompany H bypurchasingCatchAll.Althoughhesitantatfirst,ReelDealagreesandfollowsBillyRays 4 constanturgingsthatCatchAllcouldbepurchasedforastealbecauseithasbeenlosingmoney.  p BillyRayalsoconvincesCatchAllitshouldconsiderabuyoutbyReelDeal.CatchAllagrees.  \ BillyRayurgesReelDealtouseNationalBanktofinancethetransactionalthoughBestBankoffers H significantlylowerrates.Asapartofthetransaction,ReelDealacquiresallofCatchAllsassets 4 includingaccountreceivablesandoutstandingpurchaseordersforequipment.     Afterthetransactionwascompleted,ReelDealdiscoveredthatthemanufacturingandretail  productsformerlyofCatchAllweredefectiveandmalfunctioned.Asadirectresult,ReelDealwas  unabletotimelyproduceorderedproducts.ThiscausedReelDealtolosesales,goodwillwithits  customers,andfacemanywarrantyclaims.ReelDealbegantomissthehighmonthlyloanpayments l toNationalBankandsuffereditsworstfinancialyearsinceitfirstbeganbusiness.ReelDeallater X  discoveredthatBillyRaywasawarethatCatchAllhadsignificantcustomerrelationsproblemsprior D! tothetransaction. 0"    AgainstwhomcanReelDealassertacauseofaction?Inyouranswerevaluatethe $X" theoriesunderwhichRealDealmayassertacauseofactionandthelikelihoodofrecovery. $D #     h+&* Xh X X  REPRESENTATIVEANSWER1       ReelDeal,Inc.( RD)mayassertthefollowingclaims:  AgainstBillyRay( BR): t     Negligenceoccurswhenthereisabreachofaduty,proximatelycausinginjury.Here,as L  RDsfinancialadvisor,BRowedhisclientadutytogivesoundfinancialadvice.BRbreachedthat 8  dutywhenherepeatedlyurgedRDintothepoorpurchasedecisionofcompanywith significant $ t customerrelationsproblems.AsadirectconsequenceofBRsnegligence,RDsufferedlostsales,  ` goodwillandextraloaninterestpayments.  L    FiduciaryDuty $    Agentsowedutiesofcare,loyaltyandinformation.Here,BRservedasRDsagentfor   purposesoffinancialadvice.BRbreachedhisdutyofcarebyhis constanturgingstogothrough   withadealthatcouldnotreasonablybeseentobeinRDsbestinterests.     BRbreachedhisdutyofloyaltyintworespects.First,heurgedRDtopurchaseCatchAll, p anotherofhisclients,withoutapparentlyinformingofRDofhisexistingrelationshipwithCatch \ All.Secondly,heurgedRDtouseNationalBank,despiteknowingitwouldresultinhigher H paymentsandwithapersonalfinancialinterestinthetransaction(BRstoodtogetafeefortheloan.) 4 ThedutyofinformationwasalsobreachedwhenBRfailedtofullydiscloseCatchAllsdismaltrack  p recordw/itscustomers.BRhadadutytodiscloseallrelevantinformationofwhichhewasaware.  \ WhileBRmightclaimthathecompliedbydisclosingthatCAhad beenlosingmoney,the H additionalsignificantfactofCAscustomerrelationproblemsshouldhavebeendisclosed. 4   RDagainstEGB     RDmayraisealloftheaboveclaimsagainstEGBaswell.Underthedoctrineofrespondeat  superior,anemployeesnegligencewillbeimputedtohisemployerwhenheisactinginthescope  ofhisemployment.Here,BRwasalreadyactinginthescopeofhisemploymentw/EGBbygiving  financialadvice.Thus,EGBwillbeliableforBRsnegligence. l   Additionally,EGBowedanindependentdutytoRDwhichitbreachedthroughthepoor D! financialadvice.BRsknowledgeofCatchAllsshakyhistory/customerdealingswillbeimputed 0"  toEGBaswell. #l!   BothBRandEGBwilldefendonthegroundsthatRDwascontributorilynegligentin $D # enteringintoapurchasew/acompanyknowntobelosingmoney.However,becauseBR&EGB %0!$ werepaidpreciselytoadviseclientsonthe financialfeasibilityofbusinesstransactions,RDs &"% relianceonBRsadviceisreasonable. '#&    Misrepresentationoccurswhenanagentmisrepresentsamaterialfact,knowingthatanother )$( willrelyonthemisrepresentationandtheinjuredpartyactuallyreliestotheirdetriment.Here,BR |*%) misrepresentedthestatusofCatchAllbyfailingtodisclosethe significantcustomerrelations h+&* problems.AlthoughBRmayclaimthathedidnotactuallysayanythingmisleading,hisomission T,'+ amountstoamisrepresentationbecauseofhisfiduciaryobligationtoRD.  @-(,    #X|XX X|t#UXYXXX|REPRESENTATIVEANSWER2    ReelDeal( R)mayassertthefollowingcausesofaction:      ReelDealv.BillyRay: BreachofFiduciaryDuties .BillyRay( B),asRsfinancial ` advisor,hasarelationshipoftrustwithhisclients,andastheiragent,hehasfiduciaryduties,which P  hebreachedinthiscase.Thesedutiesinclude:thedutyofcare,thedutyofopenness,thedutyto <  provideinformationandtodisclosurematerialfacts,andthedutyofloyalty. ( x   Here,Bbreachedhisdutyofcarebyfailingtoactwiththeordinaryprudenceofafinancial  P  advisor,byhis constanturgingsthatRpurchaseacompanythathad significantcustomerrelations  <  problemsandhad beenexperiencingsomefinancialdifficulties.Here,Bfailedtouseduecare (  bynotfullyinvestigatingCsstatustomakesureitwasawisepurchaseonRspart.     Further,BbreachedhisdutyofdisclosureandinformationbypresumablynotprovidingR   withsufficientfactstomakeaninformeddecision.Healsobreachedthisdutybyfailingtodisclose   toRthatthereasonhe urgedRtouseabankwithhigherrateswasbecausethebankpaidhima t feeifhedidso. `   Finally,Bbreachedhisdutyofcaretohisclient.Asafinancialagent,hehadadutytoact 8 andadviseinanunbiasedway,andtorefrainfrommixinghisinterestsintransactionsinvolvinghis $t clients.Here,hehadaninterestonbothsidesofthetransaction,ashewastryingtoencourageboth ` RandCatchallfromenteringintothetransaction.BdidnotremainloyaltoR,ashealsohad L interestswithCatchall.BalsobreachedhisdutyofloyaltybyurgingRtouseabankthatcharged 8 RhigherratesthanRcouldhavegottenelsewhere.BsfeefromNationalBankwasalso $ inappropriateandabreachofhisdutyofloyalty.    ReelDealv.BillyRay: Negligence .Rmayalsohaveacauseofactionintortfornegligence.  Negligenceariseswhenadutyisbreached,causingdamages.Here,BhadadutytoRnottoact  negligentlyandinselfinterestinhisfinancialadvisements,andhebreachedthatdutybyhis t  urgingswithoutadequateinvestigation(or,alternatively,withadequateinvestigation,butw/o `  adequatedisclosureofmaterialinformationtoR).Butforhisbreach,Rwouldnothaveenteredinto L! theilladvisedtransaction,andlosstoitscompanywouldnothaveoccurred. 8"    Rv.EGB: Negligence .Rmaybringac.o.a.undernegligenceagainstEGBunderthetheory $`" ofrespondeatsuperior.Employers/principalsareliableintortforthenegligent/tortiousconductof %P # theiremployees/agentsifactingw/inthescopeoftheiremployment.Here,Bactednegligentlywhile %t@BXl""  ,H+ 4 <DL!,X!)XH  ,?(f f <DL!X!?22  2  .3     : ProhibitanynonresidentoftheTownfromcanvassinguponTownpropertyforany   reason;23݌   Ќ -,X!)Xff X!-   uX,4 <DL!!)\+- 0d247l9;>t@B,X!)Xu""  ,H+ 4 <DL!,X!)XH  ,?(f f <DL!X!?52  3  .3     : Prohibitanypersonnotaffiliatedwithacivicorreligiousorganizationfromstagingsit   insonTownproperty.5q6݌ p Ќ -,X!)Xff X!-   fI,4 <DL!!47l9;>t@B,X!)Xf  Theviolationofanyofthelawswouldbeamisdemeanorpunishablebyafineof H $50,000. 4    X|XX X|X&XX X|X&XXX&X&XXX& X>XXX&     8  B    9C  89݌̌   X>XX X> X|XX X>_     X|XX X|X&XX X|X&XXX&X&XXX& X>XXX&     &  l:  Whatadvicewouldyougiveastoeachpieceoflegislation?Discussfully.B    ;C  ' =;l:I;݌  \ Ќ   X>XX X> X|XX X>  Y>X|X\  `Calisto MTX X|5-Y X|XXX|   X|XX X|X&XX X| X>XXX&     <   &%X X>REPRESENTATIVEANSWER1<=݌ 4 Ќ   X>X% & X|XX X>  ) X|XXXX X|=)=% X|XXXX X|%   `     h      p     IwouldfirstinformtheTownCommissionersthatmostoftheproposedlegislationisviolativeof  theConstitution.  Law1 l TheprohibitionbanningcanvassingonTownpropertyforanycauseisvagueandoverbroad.It X isvagueandoverbroadbecauseablanketprohibitionofthiskinddoesnotpermitfor D  emergenciesorexceptionsandwillthuslikelybestrickenasunconstitutional.Thisprohibition 0! isalsoapriorrestraintthatbansspeechbeforeitismade.Thereisnocompellingstateinterest "l  forthisprohibitionitwillbestricken. #X! Thisprohibitionisalsoinviolationofthe1stAmendment,madeapplicabletotheStatesviathe $0 # 14thAmendmentsDueProcessClause.Onpublicproperty,thegovernmentispermittedtoenact %!$ viewpointandcontentneutrallegislationpertainingtospeech.Nonetheless,thelegislationis &"% subjecttointermediatescrutiny.TheburdenwillbeontheTowntoestablishthatthisstatuteis '"& substantiallyrelatedtoanimportantgovernmentalinterest.ItisdoubtfulthattheTownwillbe (#' abletosustainthisburdenbecausetheprohibitionistoobroadandwouldrestricttoomuch |)$( speech. h*%) Law2 @,'+ TheprohibitionbanningnonresidentsfromcanvassingTownpropertywouldnotprevaileither .h)- becauseitviolatesboththePrivilegesandImmunitiesClauseofArticleIVandtheEqual  ProtectionClause.ThePrivilegesandImmunitiesClausepreventsstatesorstategovernments  fromdenyingbenefitstononresidentsthatareaffordedtoresidents.Herenonresidentsarenot  permittedtocanvassforanyreasonandarenotevengivenachancetoobtainapermit.Inorder t toprevailtheTownwouldhavetoestablishthatthebanisnecessaryandcloselyrelatedtoan ` importantgovernmentgoal.TheTownwillbeunabletosustainthisburdenbecausethisbanis L  nottheleastrestrictivemeansbywhichtheTowncouldachieveitsobjective.Thus,this 8  prohibitionshouldbestricken. $ t Becausethisprohibitiondisparatelydistinguishesbetweenresidentsandnonresidentsitwillbe  L  subjecttoanEqualProtectionchallenge.TheEqualProtectionclauserequiresthatallsimilarly  8  situatedpeopleshouldbetreatedequally.Thisprohibitionwillbesubjecttoarationalbasis $  analysissinceitdoesnotdirectlytargetasuspectclassorinfringeonaguaranteedright.The   burdenwillbeonapotentialplaintifftoestablishthatthebanisnotrationallyrelatedtoa   significantgovernmentalinterest.Whilelawssubjecttotherationalbasistestarepresumptively   valid,thisbanwillprobablybeheldinvalidbecauseitisnotrationallyrelatedandis   unreasonable. p ) X|XXXX X|>)% X|XXXX X|%Y>X|X\  `Calisto MTX X|<YU >X|X\  `Calisto MTXX|U#X|XX X|L#)X|XXXXX|OL)Law3 H Thisprohibitionagainstnoncivicorreligiousorganizationsstagingsitinswillbestrickenas  p well.TheEstablishmentClausedictatesthatgovernmentactionnotresultinapreference.  \ Seeminglythisbanwhichpermitsonlyreligiousorganizationsandcivicorganizationstoengage H insitinsprefersreligiousgroupsovernonreligiousgroups.Thusthebanwillbesubjectto 4 strictscrutiny.TheTownwillbeunabletocarryitsburdenbecausethebanisnotnecessaryto   furtheracompellingstateinterest.EveniftheTownwereabletosustainthisburden,theban   wouldbesubjecttotheLemontest.ToprevailunderthistestStateactionmustbe:1)secularin  purpose;2)itsprimaryeffectsshouldnotadvancenorinhibitreligion;3)andshouldnotinvolve  excessivegovernmentandreligiousentanglement.Therewouldbenoexcessiveentanglement  becausetheTowndoesnotaffirmativelyauthorize,facilitate,orencouragereligion. l ЀHowever,whilethebanisseeminglysecularinpurpose,itadvancesreligionbecauseonlya X  selectfewgroupsarepermittedtoengageinsitins. D! Penalty #l! Themisdemeanorfineof$50,000isunreasonablyexcessiveandacourtwouldprobablyfindthat $D # itviolatesthe8thAmendmentsprotectionagainstexcessivefines.Thisfinemayalsobe %0!$ violativeofproceduralDueProcessifanoffenderisnotgivennoticeandahearing. &"%    X|XXX|   ,.|)- Ї #X|XX X|TT#UXYXXX|REPRESENTATIVEANSWERNO.2    Eachpieceoflegislationhasproblems:  Law1!Thefirstproblemwiththislawisthatitisaviolationofthe1stAmendmentsrightof ` freespeech,madeapplicabletotheStatesthroughtheDueProcessClauseofthe14th L  Amendmentsinceitcouldbedeemedvoidforvaguenessandoverbroad.Itprohibitsthe 8  promotionofanycausewithoutfirstgettingapermit!thiscouldhaveachillingeffectonspeech $ t asthepublicmaynotknowwhatexactlyisprohibitedbythislanguage.Theordinanceis  ` overbroadinthatitgoesbeyondwhatisnecessarytoachieveitsend.  L  Thispermitorlicenserequirementmaybeanunconstitutionalpriorrestraintonspeech. $  Requiringalicensebeforeallowingapersontospeakmaybepermittedifthelicensing   requirementisnarrowlydrawn,definite,andnecessary.Theremustalsobeprocedural   safeguardsinplacefortheindividualswhoareresponsibleforissuingthelicensetoinsurethey   donthavetoobroaddiscretion.   IwouldtelltheTownCommissionerstonarrowthebreadthofthelegislationandclarifywhat \ exactlyisprohibited.Iwouldalsoadvisethemtohavestandardsandproceduralsafeguardsin H placetoensurethatthelicensingrequirementisconstitutional.Also,becausethisordinances 4 seemstobeacontentneutralordinanceandnotbasedonraceororigintheTownmustmeet  p intermediatescrutinyandthelawmusthaveasubstantialinterestandbenarrowlytailoredto  \ achievethisimportantinterest. H Law2!ThispieceoflegislationmayviolatetheCommerceClauseorthePrivilegesand   ImmunitiesClauseofArticleIV.Iftheordinancediscriminatesagainstnonresidentsinfavorof   residentsoftheTownwithoutsomeimportantgovernmentinterestindoingsotheremaybea  violationoftheP&IClauseifitaffectsthenonresidentseconomiclivelihoodsortheircivil  liberties.  ThislawcouldalsoviolatetheCommerceClauseifitisdiscriminatoryandhasanundueburden X  oninterstatecommerce.Congresshasthepowertoregulatethechannelsofinterstatecommerce D! andifastatesactionusurpsthispoweritwillbeunconstitutional.Evenifanactivityispurely 0"  intrastateifitscumulativeeffectinoninterstatecommerce,itiswithinCongressregulatory #l! power. $X" IwouldadvisetheTowntonotdiscriminateagainstnonresidentsinitslegislation. %0!$ Law3!Thisordinancemayviolatethe1stAmendmentsEstablishmentClausemadeapplicable '#& totheStatesbythe14thAmendmentifitdoesnotmeettheLemonTest.Thelawis (#' unconstitutionalunderthattest:ifthestateorlocalactionisnotsecularinnature;ifitinhibits )$( religionasitsprimarypurpose;orifitpromotesexcessiveentanglementbetweenthegovernment |*%) andreligion.Thisordinanceseemstobeallowingreligiousorganizationstostateandparticipate h+&* insitinswhileprohibitingothersfromdoingso.Thefactthatitalsoallowscivicorganizations T,'+ todosodoesnotmakeitsecularinnature,andwillnotalleviatethefactthatthisisexcessive @-(, entanglementwithreligion. ,.|)- ЇThisordinanceviolatesthe1stAmendmentandIwouldadvisetheTowntoeliminateit.  Penalty!Finally,the$50,000finemaybeexcessiveandaviolationofthe8thAmendment.  H+ 4 <DL!,X!4XH#X|XXUXYT#UXYXXX|Ԁ t #X|XXUXYe# X|XXX|  ` @%QUESTION3     BradshawistheCEOofFreshAir,Inc.,amanufacturingcompanylocatedinWestminster,  Maryland.Fromtimetotime,FreshAirusesSupplierCo.asasubcontractoronprojects.FreshAir t doesallofitsbankingatCarrollCountyNationalBank.AllchecksforFreshAir,Inc.areprepared ` andsignedbyitstreasurer,Teresa.WhilevisitingTeresaoneday,Earlstealsseveralcorporate L  checkswithoutherknowledge. 8  AlthoughEarlisnotanemployeeofFreshAir,Inc.orSupplierCo.,hepreparesacheckpayableto  ` theorderof SupplierCo.for$10,000andthenforgesTeresassignatureonthecheck.Earlthen  L  takesthecheckanddepositsitintoanaccountatBestBaltimoreBankwhichheopenedinthename  8  of SupplierCo.,listinghimselfastheauthorizedagent.ThecheckishonoredbyCarrollCounty $  NationalBankwhichdebitsFreshInc.saccountintheamountof$10,000.Afewdayslater,Earl   withdrawsthemoneyfromtheaccountatBestBaltimoreBank.     Whiletimelyreconcilingthebooks,TeresarealizeswhatEarlhasdoneandinformsBradshaw.After   completingworkonaprojectforFreshAir,SupplierCo.demandspaymentforitswork. p   Giveadetailedanalysisofanycivilclaimsthatmaybeasserted,andagainstwhom,under H MarylandCommercialLawasaresultoftheforgedcheck.  4       REPRESENTATIVEANSWER1   \ SupplierCo. 4   SupplierCo.candemandpaymentfromFreshAirfortheservicesrenderedandshouldreceiveit.     LiabilityofEarl   X  Under3110(a),theforgedcheckwaspayabletoEarleventhoughhewasunauthorizedto l signitandforgedTheresassignature.Emadethecheckoutto SupplierCo.becausehe(Earl) X  intendedthatchecktobepaidtohim(Earl)nottoSupplierCo.,thusSupplierCo.hadnorightsin D! thecheck. 0"   #l!  X  Earlisanimposterunder3404(b)(1).WhileSupplyCo.isarealcompany;Earl(theperson $X" whoseintentdeterminestowhomthecheckispayable)doesnotintendSupplytohavethemoney, $D # eventhoughitislistedaspayee.Thus,accordingto3404(b)(1),anypersoninpossessionisa %0!$ holder.Thus,Earlwasaholder,andthensowasBestBaltimoreBank,thensowasCarrollCo.Bank &"% (whetherornotEarlendorsed,under4205). '#&   @*  Under3301,Earlandallthesubsequentholderswereentitledtoenforcetheinstrument. )$( However,becauseEarlforgedTheresassignature,itisunauthorizedunder3403.Thus,itwould |*%) beineffectiveagainstFreshAir.However,itiseffectiveasregardsBestBaltimoreBankandCarroll h+&* Co.Bankbecausetheyingoodfaithpaidtheinstrument(BestBalt.toEarl,CarrollCo.toBest T,'+ Balt.). @-(,  ,.|)-   Under4208(a),Earlbreachedthepresentmentwarrantyof4208(a)(3)!heclearlyknew  thatheforgedthesignature.ThusheisliabletoBestBaltimoreBank(drawerwhoacceptedthe  draft)andtoCarrollCountyNationalBank(under4208(a)(ii)).Under4208(b),Earlisliablefor  that$10,000pluscompensationforexpensesandlossofinterestresultingfromthebreach. t   Ofcourse,EarlisliabletoFreshAirforconversion. L    BestBaltimoresLiability $ t     Underpreviousanalysis,BestBaltimoreBankwasaholder,andEarlsunauthorized  L  signaturewaseffective.BestBaltimoredidnotbreach4208(a),sinceunder3301(i)BestBaltimore  8  wasaholderandhadnoknowledgeofforgery.Thus,BestBaltimorehasnoliability. $    CarrollCountyBank       FreshAirwouldliketohaveCarrollCo.Bankbeliableandpaybackthe$10,000itwithdrew   fromFreshAirsaccount.However,CarrollCo.actedcorrectlyunder4401(a),ifthecheckwas p properlypayable.ThecheckwasproperlypayableifitwasauthorizedbyFreshAir.WhileTeresa \ astreasurer,couldauthorizethechecks,Earlcouldnot.Thus,absentanyspecialagreementbetween H FreshAirandCarrollCo.Bank,thecheckwasnotproperlypayableandCarrollCo.wouldthen 4 havetoreturn$10,000toFreshAir(andthenseek$10,000backfromEarlunder4208).  p   Conclusion H     UnlessthepartiesfindEarlandtake$10,000fromhimunder4208(b)(orifthepartyis   FreshAir,conversion),CarrollBankislikelytobetheonestuckwiththeloss.     REPRESENTATIVEANSWER2         BypresentingtheforgedchecktoBestBaltimoreBank,Earlmadeseveralimplied l warranties:1)thatEarlwasentitledtoenforcethedraft(check),2)thecheckhadnotbeen X  altered,and3)thatEarldidnotknowthedraftwasunauthorized(4208(a)13).Oneandthree D! wereuntrueandsothedraweebank,CarrollCounty,NBmayrecoverdamagesagainstEarl. 0"  FreshAirmayrecoverfromEarlforconversion. #l!     SincethesignatureonthecheckwasnotTeresas(rather,EarlsforgeryofTeresas $D # signature)itisineffectiveasanauthorizedsignatureexceptincasesinvolvingaholderinduecourse %0!$ (HDC)(3403).AHDCmusttakeingoodfaith,forvalueandwithoutknowledgeofanydefects &"% ordefense.Becausethecheckwasnotauthorized(3403),itwasnotproperlypayablefromFresh '#& AirsaccountandthereforeCCNBshouldrecredittheaccount(4401)(a). (#'   Thedraftispayabletothepersonintendedbythepersonsigningasissuerregardlessofthe |*%) nameused(3110(a)).Here,EarlsintentwasthathereceivedthemoneyunderhisSupplierCo. h+&* bankaccount.TherealSupplierCo.wasneverintendedtobenefit,so anypersoninpossessionof T,'+ theinstrumentisitsholder.(3404(b)(1)).ThiswouldmakeEarlaholderofthecheckandthen @-(, BBBbecameaholderwhenitreceivedthecheckforcollection(4205(1)).AsaholderBBBwas ,.|)- entitledtoenforcetheinstrument(3301).Also,BBBhadnoknowledgeofaproblemwiththe  checksoitdidnotbreachitswarrantiesunder(4208).ThereforeBBBisnotsubjecttosuit.         @  @`  @  @  @h  @  @ #X|XX X|e# YXYXXX|QUESTION4#X|XXYXY#6X XXX|   w  5  6 X6X66  5  5݌̌6X X66X X X6X   5  6 X6X66  5    6X X6#X|X X6XI#YXYXXX|Alice,attheageof35,decideditwastimetogetherlifebackontrackstartingwithher L physicalcondition.Herphysicalconditionwaspooringeneralandshehadahistoryof 8 significantlowbackproblemsincludingaherniateddisk.5݌ $t ЌYXYXXYXY6X XXYXY   YXYX X6X5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X59  59܉݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5j    AftercheckingoutvarioushealthfacilitiesshedecidedtojoinSuperfit,ahealthclub  L locatedinHowardCounty,Maryland.Superfitpromised appropriatefitnessprogramsgearedto  8 theindividualsfitnesslevelsupervisedbyhealthspecialists.Alicewasrequiredtocomplete  $ Superfitsmembershipagreement,whichsetforththepaymentandotherobligationsof    membership.Shealsodisclosedherphysicalconditionontheappropriateportionofthe    Agreement.TheAgreementalsocontainedthefollowingclause:5j ݌   ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X52  52Վ݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5c  ݀ AllexerciseshallbeundertakenbymeatmysoleriskandSuperfit,itsservants,agentsor p  employeesshallnotbeliabletomeforanyclaims,demands,injuries,damages,actions,or \  causesofactionwhatsoever,tomypersonarisingoutoforconnectedwiththeuseoftheservices H  andfacilitiesofSuperfitbyme,andIexpresslyherebyforeverreleaseanddischargeSuperfit 4 fromallclaimsandinjurieswhichmayresultfrominstruction,actsoractionsofanykindof  p Superfit,itsservants,agentsoremployees.5c݌  \ ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5   5 Ó݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5Q    Christa,aSuperfitemployee,conductedaninitialevaluationbyaskingAlicetoperform 4 variousflexibilityandstrengthtesting.AlicewasdirectedbyChristatouseanuppertorso   weightmachineandlifta90poundweightonetimewithherarms.Whileperformingthis   exercise,Alicefeltsignificantpaininherrightshoulder.SheinformedChristawhodidnotseek  immediatemedicalattentionbutinsistedthatAlicekeepgoing,saying nopain,nogain.5Q݌  ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5Ǘ  5Ǘj݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5    Alicesufferedpainfollowingtheincidentandultimatelyhadtoundergoshouldersurgery l foraconditionherdoctorattributedtotheuppertorsoweightmachine.Healsoinformedhershe X shouldnothavestartedwitha90poundweight.5݌ D ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5\  5\݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5    AlicehassuedSuperfitandChristafornegligence.Superfitfilesamotionforsummary  l judgmentbasedontheexculpatoryclause.50݌ !X ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5t  5t݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5    WhatargumentscanAlicemakeinherresponsetothemotion?5H݌ "0! ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X55  55ء݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5f    Howshouldthecourtruleandwhy? 5f ݌ $ # ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5ݣ    5ݣ݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   REPRESENTATIVEANSWER1 &!% 5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5Z  5Z݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5    AMotionforSummaryJudgmentwillbegrantedwherethereisnogenuineissueof h(#' materialfactinthecase,andthemovingpartyisentitledtojudgmentasamatteroflaw. T)$( SuperfitsMotionforSummaryJudgmentshouldnotbegrantedforthefollowingreasons:5.݌ @*%) ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  5݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5@    AlicecanarguethattheexculpatoryclausedidnotdisclaimSuperfitsexpresswarranty ,h'+  thatherfitnessprogramwouldbegearedtoherindividualfitnesslevel.So,shecanarguethat -T(, Superfitwasnegligentbynotlivinguptotheirpromise,andthattheirnegligenceactuallyand  proximatelycausedherinjuries.5@݌   YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5   5 í݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5Q    Alicecanalsoarguethattheexculpatoryclauseisnotvalidonitsface.First,exculpatory t clausesarepermissibleunderMarylandlawiftheylimitrecoveryinnegligenceactions. ` However,Superfitsclauselimitsrecoveryinallactions,includinginclaimsforintentionaltorts L  andrecklessorgrosslynegligentbehavior.Thecourtwouldlikelyupholdtheexculpatoryclause 8  ifsimplenegligenceisfound,butwouldnotupholditifSuperfitsconductinvolvedexpress $ t negligence.ThiscreatesanissueoffactandissufficientbasistodenytheMotion.5Q݌  ` ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5B  5B݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5s    Also,Alicecanarguethattheexculpatoryclausewastheproductofgrosslyunequal  8  bargaininganditsresultisclearlyagainstapublicpolicymandate.Whiletheformerargumentis $  unlikely,asympatheticcourtmightagreewiththepublicpolicyargument.5s݌   ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  5݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5"    InmakingtheseclaimsinresponsetoSuperfitsmotion,Alicehasplacedmaterialfacts   indispute,soacourtwouldnotlikelygrantSummaryJudgmentatthisphase.5"ŷ݌   ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X50  50ӹ݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5a    OfnoteisthefactthatSuperfitmightverywellclaimthatAlicehadapreexisting \ conditionandthat(1)herallegednegligencewasnotthecauseofherinjuries,and/or(2)thatshe H assumedtheriskvoluntarilyandknowingly,therefore,barringanyrecovery.But,bymaking 4 thesearguments,Superfitwouldfurtherbeintroducingagenuineissueofmaterialfact,making  p thegrantofsummaryjudgmentintheirfavorallthemoreunlikely.5a݌  \ ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  5c݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  5݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X  5"  REPRESENTATIVEANSWER2 5"݌   ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  5E݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5    AliceshouldmakethefollowingargumentsinherMotionforSummaryJudgment:5v݌  ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5q  5q݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  Theexculpatoryclausedoesnotexcusegrosslynegligentconduct.Abusinessopentothepublic  hasdutiesofcarethatcannotbeavoided.5E݌ l ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  5)݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  ChristasgrossnegligenceinadvisingAliceovercomestheexculpatoryclause,whichisnotand D! cannotcovergrossnegligence.SuperfitisresponsibleforChristasnegligenceduetorespondeat 0"  superior.5Z݌ #l! ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  5݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5'  Theexculpatoryclausedoesnotovercomeaffirmativesearchesofduty.ChristaandSuperfit $D # affirmativelygaveAlicedangerousdirections,causingtheiractionstogobeyondmere %0!$ negligencetoAlice.Theexculpatoryclauseisinvalidasunconscionable.WhileinMaryland &"% adhesiveprovisionsareacceptable,thisprovisiongoesbeyondadhesivenessandinto '#& unconscionabilityduetoitsbreadthandscope.5'݌ (#' ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5T  5T݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  TheexculpatoryclausedoesnotattributeanassumptionofrisktoAlice.5(݌ |*%) ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  5݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5F  Thecourtshouldallowthecausetogoforward.AnexculpatoryclausesuchasSuperfitsshould T,'+ beconsideredprotectiveagainstordinarynegligence,butnotagainstthekindofbehavior @-(, inflicteduponAliceatSuperfit.Christaputherselfforwardasanexpert,causingAlicetorelyon ,.|)- Christasadvicedespitehershoulderpain.SuperfitwasalsoinapositiontoknowofAlices  weakenedphysicalcondition.5F݌  ЌYXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  6X X6YXYX X6X5  5(݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY     Thedegreeofnegligence,ifany,istheissuehere.Sincethereisamaterialissueoffact,the t courtshoulddenytheMotionforSummaryJudgment. `  #X|XXYXYa##XX|#   `     h      p      x   -  X|X  -)/ QUESTION5#XX|#    XX|XYXYXXX| Norn,Inc.,adulyformedMarylandCorporation("Norn")wasengagedinthebusinessof ^ developingbiomedicalinformationforvaccines.Norndecidedtoborrowmoneytopurchasea J highpoweredmicroscopeforitsresearchfacilities.TheCEOandmajoritystockholderofNorn, 6 Mr._Loman_,requestedthatitscertifiedpublicaccountants,Debit,CreditandBalance,LLC, " r ("DCB")adulyformedMarylandlimitedliabilitycompany,performanauditandpreparea  ^ financialstatementtobeusedbyNorn'sbankinevaluatingwhetheritshouldloanmoniesto  J Norntopurchasethemicroscope.  6  X XInJune2002,throughtheeffortsoftwocertifiedpublicaccountantsemployedbyDCB,    John_Stubbs_,memberofDCB,("_Stubbs_")andTimCheck("Check"),therequestedaccounting   serviceswereperformed.DCBchose_Stubbs_ԀtomanagetheaccountingservicesforNornasit   wasDCB'smostprofitableclient,andCheck,ajunioraccountant,waschosenby_Stubbs_Ԁtoassist   himduetohisfamiliaritywiththeoperationsofNorn. n   X XInconnectionwiththebank'sreviewofNorn'sloanapplication,thebankrequestedand F receivedaletterfromDCBthatstatedthatthebankcouldrelyonthefinancialstatementand 2 auditopinioninevaluatingwhetheritwouldmaketheloan.Basedontheinformationcontained n inthosedocuments,thebankapprovedtheloantoNorn.  Z  X XSevenmonthsafterthebankandNornconsummatedtheloanforthemicroscope,Norn 2 wasunabletopayitsexpenses,andfailedtomaketherequiredloanpaymentsforthemicroscope  tothebank.ThebanksuedDCBandeachofitsmembersindividuallyforitsdamagesdueto   DCB'sfailuretodiscloseinthefinancialstatementandauditopinionthatsixadditional  substantialpaymentsofearnedandunpaidcommissionsweremadetoNorn'ssalesteampriorto  thedateofthefinancialstatement.Theinclusionofthesepaymentswouldhavehadamaterial ~ adverseeffectonNorn'sfinancialcondition. j    V   Youarecounselforthebank.Whatadvicewouldyougivetothebankonthelegal B liabilityof_Stubbs_,Check,DCB,anditsothermembers,andthelikelihoodofsuccessofa . ~ suitfordamagesagainsteachofthem?  !j  X&    REPRESENTATIVEANSWER1  "B!   '")LegalLiability&_Stubbs_ $ #  XAsamemberofDCB,asaCPA,andastheManageroftheNornaccountingservices, &!% _Stubbs_ԀisliabletotheBankfordamages. '"&  X XAscounseltotheBank,Iwouldadvisethat_Stubbs_,asalicensedprofessionalin f)$( Maryland,cannotescapepersonalliabilityforerrorsormalpractice.AsamemberoftheLLC, R*%) _Stubbs_ԀisliablealsofortheworkconductedbyDCB.Becauseofhispersonalinvolvementin >+&* managingtheaccountofNorn,whichfailedtoincludetheunpaidcommissions,_Stubbs_Ԁislikely *,z'+ tobefoundliablefordamagessufferedbytheBankinrelianceonDCBsletter. -f(,  X .R)- Check   XAsalicensedCPAintheStateofMaryland,Checkwillbepersonallyliableforerrorsor  malpracticerelatedtohisprofessionalservices.HehadfamiliaritywiththeoperationsofNorn, t asstatedinthefactpattern,soheislikelytobefoundliableforhiserrors.Heactedunderthe ` supervisionof_Stubbs_,aMember,soChecksfailuresmaybeattributedtoboth_Stubbs_,andto L  DCB. 8   XCivilLiabilityofDCB  `  XDCBwillbeliableforthedamagesincurredduetotheFirmsfailuretodisclose  8  informationmaterialtotheBanksdecisiontoloanmoneytoNorn.Itisboundbytheactionsof $  itsmembersandemployeesactingwithinthescopeofauthority._Stubbs_,amember,andCheck,   anemployee,failedtomeettheirprofessionalduties.    XOtherMembersofDCB    XOthermembersofDCBwillprobablynotbeheldpersonallyliablefortheBanks \ damages.AnymemberwhojoinedtheLLCaftertheflawedserviceswererenderedarefree H frompersonalliability.Anymemberswhohadnoconnectionorsupervisoryroletotheservices 4 renderedaresimilarlyfreefrompersonalliability.Ifhowever,othermemberswereinvolvedin  p anymannerinthecase,theymaybeliabletotheextentoftheirpersonalinvolvementor  \ oversight. H  X&    REPRESENTATIVEANSWER2      'v XLimitedLiabilityCompany(LLC):AnLLCisabusinessentityinMarylandwith  membersasowners.Theliabilityformembersislimitedtothefinancialcapitalcontributions  putintotheLLC.Here,DCBisanLLC,soallindividualssolelyasmembersofLLCarenot  personallyliablefordamages. l  X XProfessionalServicesException:IfanindividualmemberofanLLCrendersprofessional D! servicestoanotherindividual,thatmember,inMD,maylosethepersonalliabilityshield.Here, 0"  accountingisaprofessionalservice,sosuchservicesmayincurliability. #l!  X XDCB:AnLLCisliableforthedebtsincurredandtortscommittedbyitoritsagents $D # actingunderitsauthority.Here,DCBfailedtodisclosetheadditionalsubstantialpayments,and %0!$ _Stubbs_ԀandCheckwereagentsworkingunderitsauthority,soDCBwillbeliablesince material &"% adversityisshownandiftheagentskneworshouldhaveknownofpayments.Here,itisupto '#& jurytomakethedetermination,butitisprobable. (#'  X XOtherMembers(_OM_):Regularmembers(owners)oftheLLCareliableforcapital |*%) contributionsinadditiontoalloftheLLCsotherassets.Assumingclaimgoesbeyonditsassets, h+&* _OM_Ԁwillonlybeliableforuptoitscapitalcontributions. T,'+  X @-(,   Check:NonmemberemployeesofLLCarenotpersonallyliableforthedebts/tortsof   theLLC,exceptheorshemaybepersonallyliableforownacts.Here,Checkwouldnotbe  liableforDCBsor_Stubbs_actions,butCheckwouldbeliableforhisconductinoffering  professionalservicesthatwerenegligent. t     X_Stubbs_:AsamemberofanLLC,_Stubbs_Ԁisnotnormallypersonallyliable;onlyliablefor L  capitalcontributions.Here,hewasworkinginaccountingservicesatsupervisorlevel,soit 8  wouldhavetobeproventhathefirstkneworshouldhaveknownofthesubstantialpayments. $ t Here,undertheprofessionalservicesexceptionandduetohissupervisoryservices,_Stubbs_Ԁwill  ` bepersonallyliable.  L   #X|XXYXYG##XX|(#  X-    8    X|X X|XXX|  QUESTION6       BigBucks,Inc.(BigBucks),aninvestmentcompany,enteredintoanemploymentcontract  withWillieBuffetinJanuary2000.Buffetwashiredasavicepresidentforatermofthree(3)years. t Hispaywas$200,000peryear.Buffetiswellknownintheinvestmentcommunityandbroughtwith ` himasubstantialnumberofinvestors. L    ArepresentativeofthepersonneldepartmentforSmallFry,Co.(SmallFry),another $ t investmentcompany,contactedBuffetandaskedhimtocomeworkforSmallFry.Buffetdeclined,  ` informingtherepresentativethathehadovertwo(2)yearsleftonhisemploymentcontractwithBig  L  Bucks.  8      SmallFrycontinuedtosolicitBuffet.InJanuaryof2002,SmallFrysrepresentativetold   BuffetthatBigBuckswasusingimproperaccountingmethodstoinflatethepriceoftheirstockand   thatasaresulttheywouldbethesubjectofcriminalandcivilactions.Thestatementswerenottrue.   HealsoofferedBuffet$300,000peryeartoworkforSmallFry.InJanuary2002asaresultofthis   discussion,BuffetquitBigBuckstoworkforSmallFry.AlloftheseeventsoccurredinMaryland. p   WiththelossoftheinvestorswhofollowedBuffettoSmallFry,BigBuckslost$500,000 H ingrossrevenuesfor2002. 4   InFebruary2003,thepresidentofBigBucks,Inc.comestoyou,aMarylandattorney,for  \ adviceastopotentialcause(s)ofactionandrecoveryofdamagesagainstSmallFry,Co. H Ѐ 4     Whatadvicedoyougive?Explainyourreasons.    4   @  @`  @ REPRESENTATIVEANSWER1   InterferencewithContract.    HereitispossiblethatSmallFryisliableforintentionalinterferencewithcontract! X  specificallythecontractbetweenBigBucksandBuffet. D!     SmallFryknewthattherewasacontractbetweenthetwobecauseitcontactedBuffetand #l! hetoldthemthathehadtwoyearsleftonhisemploymentcontract. $X"   SmallFryinterferedbymakingliesandaccusationsagainstBigBucksitappearstoknown %0!$ tohavebeenfalse.AlthoughanemployeeofSmallFrydidthis,SmallFrywillbeheldliableon &"% agentorrespondentsuperiortheoriesiftheemployeewasactingwithinthescopeofhisemployment. '#&   AsaresultofSmallFrysactions,BuffetquitBigBucksandwenttoworkforSmallFry! )$( breachinghiscontactwithBigBucks. |*%)   Defamation. T,'+   BigBuckscanalsosuefordefamation!thestatementsmadebySmallFryagainstBig @-(, Bucks,publishedtoBuffetresultingindamages.InMarylandthestatementsmustbefalseandfault ,.|)- mustbeshownonthedefendantspart.Faultcanbeshownbyeithershowingthedefendant(Small  Fry)knewthestatementswerefalseoractedwithrecklessdisregardforthetruth.      HereitappearsthatSmallFryknewthestatementswerefalse!theypublishedthemto t Buffetinhopesofencouraginghimtoquit.Further,thestatementswerefalse,soBigBucksshould ` beabletoprovethat. L    Damages. $ t   ForDefamation,BigBuckswillbeallowedtocollectfordamagetoitsreputation.Here  L  Corporationscanbedefamedifitleadsothers(possiblecustomersincluded)todistrusttheentity  8  orbelieveitengagesinillegalconduct. $      BecauseofSmallFrysarguablymaliciousconductitispossiblethatBigBuckscouldclaim   punitivedamagestopunishSmallFry.     BigBuckscanalsogetitsexpectancydamagesfromthebreachofcontract.Itexpectedto p gain$500,000ingrossrevenue.However,italsoexpectedtopayBuffet$200,000forthefinalyear \ ofhiscontract.Therefore,BigBucksdamagesshouldbe$300,000!orwhatitexpectedattheend H oftheyearfromitscontractwithBuffet. 4     REPRESENTATIVEANSWER2  \       Issue:   ` Defamation,slander,intentionalinterferencewithbusiness,damages,Agency. 4   IwouldadviseBigBucksaboutthecauseofactionagainstFryfordefamation.Here,Fry   communicatedanuntruestatementaboutBigBuckstoathirdparty(Buffet).Becausethestatements  weremadeinregardstoBigBucksbusiness,itwouldbeslanderperse.ThisslandercostBucks  anemployee,whobroughtin$500kayear.FrymayarguethatthestatementwasmadetoBuffet,  whoisapartofthecompany,andtherefore,doesntqualifyasathirdparty.Idonotthinkthat l argumentwouldbepersuasive.IwouldassertthatFrywouldbeliableforslanderwithdamages X  equaltotheamountofmoneyBuckslostduetoBuffetleaving($500k)minuswhathewouldhave D! paidBuffetforsalary($200k)fortotalof$300k. 0"      IwouldalsodiscussacauseofactionforintentionalinterferencewithBucksbusiness. $X" BuffetwasanemployeeunderaContractfor3years.Hewaswellknownintheinvestment $D # community,andassuchwasavaluableassettoBucks.FrysrepeatedattemptstolureBuffetaway %0!$ whenFryknewBuffetwasunderContractandFrysuseofmaliciousliesinordertogetBuffetto &"% workforhimsubstantiallyinterferedwithBucksbusinesscausinghimdamageswhenBuffetleft. '#& Iwouldusethesamevaluationasearliertodeterminetheamountofdamages.IwouldtellBucks (#' thatitislikelythathewouldrecoverunderboththeories,buthemaynotbeawardedallofthe )$( moneybecauseoftheoverlapinlosseswouldbehardtoattributetoeitherthelossofBuffetorthe |*%) actualslander. h+&*   SmallFrysCompanymayalsobevicariouslyliableforFrysuntruestatementsbecauseit @-(, wasinthecourseofhisbusinessandfurtheringitsgoalsbyobtainingBuffet. ,.|)- Ї# X X|## #      X|X QUESTION7# X X|f# h   #  h## ;#Z;    X|X  ;<    hXX| hh;<݌̌      h  # X|X ܹ##X|XX X|# X|XXX|    Marty TheMule,knowntothepoliceasadrugcourier,satdownonabenchinthe  commonareaofamallinAnneArundelCounty,Maryland.Martyplacedabriefcaseonthefloor  besidehisseat,withhishandrestingonthehandleofthebriefcase.Larry TheLifter,alocal r pickpocketandpettythief,approachedMartyfrombehind,grabbedthebriefcasebythehandle, ^  sprintedaroundthecornerandduckedintoafastfoodrestaurantinthemall.Marty,suspecting J  policesurveillance,didnotpursueLarry. 6  B+ {4 <DLX!B  B( 4 <DL{4XB<    ?+ {4 <DLX? X|XX X|  < !  Larrysatatatableuntilhewassurethecoastwasclear.Larrythengotupandwalkedoutinto ! q  thecommonarea.Ashegotup,Larrynoticedanunusuallyornateglasssaltshakeronthetableand  p  placeditishispocket.< !!݌ o  Ќ    $ X{4X$  X|XX X|          <( 4 <DLX<<    ?+ {4 <DLX? X|XX X|  <$  Martysfearofsurveillancewaswellfounded.AsLarryexitedtherestaurant,hewasarrested  Z  bytwopoliceofficerswhohadobservedtheentireincidentfromamezzanine.Theofficerslawfully  Y  seizedthebriefcasefromLarryandlawfullydiscoveredandseizedthesaltshakerduringasearch X ofLarryincidenttothearrest.<$$݌ W Ќ    $ X{4X$  X|XX X|          <( 4 <DLX<<    ?+ {4 <DLX? X|XX X|  <'  MuchtoLarryssurprise,thebriefcasecontainedapoundofmarijuanaandthesaltshaker(left B intherestaurantearlierbyMartyandthoughtbyLarrytocontainsalt)containedanounceofcocaine.<'G(݌ A Ќ    $ X{4X$  X|XX X|          <( 4 <DLX<<    ?+ {4 <DLX? X|XX X|  <v*  Theidentityofthesubstanceshasbeenestablishedbyproperlaboratorytestingbyqualified , personnel.Aproperchainofcustodyhasbeenmaintained.<v*'+݌ + Ќ    $ X{4X$  X|XX X|          <( 4 <DLX<<    ?+ {4 <DLX? X|XX X|  <"-  LarryischargedwitharobberyofMarty,possessionofacontrolleddangeroussubstance  (cocaine)andpossessionofacontrolleddangeroussubstance(marijuana).Larryasksyouto  representhim.<"--݌  Ќ    $ X{4X$  X|XX X|          <( 4 <DLX<<    ?+ {4 <DLX? X|XX X|  <0  DiscussanysubstantivedefensesthatLarrymayassert.<00݌  Ќ    $ X{4X$  X|XX X|    <( 4 <DLX<&  9     X|XX X|    942  REPRESENTATIVEANSWER1 9422 ro~2Ԍ ! Ќ     X|XX X|  '!(2    AsLarrysdefensecounsel,Iwouldpresentthefollowingsubstantivedefensestothecharges r#  bytheState: ^$!   1. ` DefensestoChargeofRobbery: "'r"$        ` (a) Larrysactions,whilemeetingthestatutoryrequirementsfortheft,donotmeet (J$& alloftheelementsofrobbery. )6%'    `  Robberyisthetaking,andcarryingawaythepropertyofanotherfromthe +') personsbodyorpresencethroughforceorintimidation. ,'*    -(+    `  LarrytookMartysbriefcasefromhisperson(Martyshandwasrestingon  thebriefcase)butLarrydidnotuseforceorintimidationtoachievethetakingoftheproperty.Larry  didnotapplyforceandcouldnothaveintimidatedorplacedMartyinfearasMartysbackwas  turnedatthetimeofthetaking.Therefore,Larryschargeofrobberyshouldbesuccessfully t defendedonthegroundsthathisactionsdonotsatisfyeitherthecommonlaworstatutoryelements ` forrobbery. L     ` (b) IwouldalsocontendthatLarrylackedtherequisitementalstateforrobbery $ t ashedidnotspecificallyintendtoobtaintheproperty(briefcase)throughfearorforce.  `     2.PossessionofMarijuana/Cocaine.  8         ` (a) Astobothchargesforpossession,IagainwouldassertthatLarrylackedthe   requisitementalstateforpossession.Larrysintentwasnottobeapossessorofdrugs.This   argumentmaybealittlemoredifficulttoprevailonbecausepossessiongenerallyonlyrequires   knowledgethatyoupossessbutnotnecessarilyknowledgethatdrugsarepresentinthethings   possessed. p      `  Astothesaleshaker,wecouldcontendthatLarryhadareasonablebelief! H thoughmistaken!thatthesaltshakercontainedsalt.Thefactsshowthatitwasonatableina 4 commonareaofamall.  p    `  Larrysreasonable,mistakenbeliefastotheshakerscontentsshouldbe H sufficienttonegatethespecificintenttopossesscocaine. 4    `  Astothebriefcase,Larrywasknownasapettythiefandpickpocket.Marty   wasknowntopoliceasadrugcourier.Aspoliceobservedtheentireincident,theyhadknowledge  thatMartywasthetruepossessorofthemarijuana.Assuch,thiscoupledwiththefactthatLarry  didnotintendtoobtainthemarijuana,shouldbeanadequatesubstantivedefensetothischarge.      &  9     X|XX X|    9U@  REPRESENTATIVEANSWER2 9U@@ .@Ԍ X  Ќ     X|XX X|  'X I@    Larryappearstobeguiltyofrobbery,buthemayresistthedrugpossessionchargesby 0"  arguinghelackedtherequisitemensrea. #l! Thecrimeofrobberyapplieswheneversomeone: $D #      ` (1) Willfully &"%    ` (2) takesproperty '#&    ` (3) fromthepersonofanother (#'    ` (4) byforce,violence,orfear )$(    ` (5) withintenttodeprivethepersonofpossession. |*%) InMaryland,unlikesomeotherstates,thetheftoffenses,includingrobbery,donotrequireanintent T,'+ topermanentlydeprivetheowner. @-(,  ,.|)-   Larrymayassertseveralsubstantivedefensestoarobberycharge,butnoneislikelytobe  successful.First,hemayarguethathedidnottakefromMartysperson;hemerelytookabriefcase  layingbesidehim.ThisargumentwillfailbecauseMartyshandrestingonthebriefcasewasenough  tomakeitpartofhis personforpurposesofarobberycharge. t   Second,LarrymayarguethathedidnottakeMartysbriefcaseby force,violence,orfear L  becausehemerelysnatcheditofftheground.Again,thoughthecontactbetweenMartyshandand 8  thecaseisenoughtomakesnatchingthebriefcaseawayanactofviolence. $ t   Thus,itappearsLarryisguiltyofrobberybasedonhistheftofthebriefcasefromMarty.  L      Thedrugpossessionchargesareanothermatter.Werethesecrimesstrictliabilityoffenses, $  Larrycouldbeguiltybasedonproofonlyofanactusreus(here,thefactthatcontrolledsubstances   wereinhispossession).Maryland,however,generallyrequiresproofofsomemensrea,inaddition   toactusreus,tosupportacriminalconviction.Here,Larrymaybeconvictedonthesechargesonly   ifheknowinglypossessedthecontrolleddangeroussubstancesinquestion.TheStatemostlikely   cannotsatisfyitsburdenofproofonthispoint(theStatemustproveallelementsofthecrime p beyondareasonabledoubt)becausehehadnoideathereweredrugsinthebriefcaseorthesalt \ shakerwhenhetookthem. H     TheStatemightcontendthatLarryassumedtheriskthattherewascontrabandintheitems  p hestole.HadthegovernmentmerelywaiteduntilLarryhadinspectedthecontentsanddiscovered  \ whathehadinhispossession,thatargumentmighthaveprevailed,becauseatthepointLarrys H possessionwouldhavebeenknowing.Onthesefacts,however,thegovernmentcannotprevail. 4     Beyondthegovernmentsinabilitytosatisfytheelementsoftheoffense,Larryalsohasa   defenseofmistakeoffactwithrespecttothesaltshaker.Becausepossessionofadangerous  controlledsubstanceisageneralintentcrime,reasonablemistakesoffactmayaffordadefense  thoughnotunreasonableones.Here,Larrysassumptionthatthesaltshakercontainedsaltrather  thancocainewasreasonablesohehasadefensetothecrime. l     Larrymightalsomakethesameargumentwithrespecttothebriefcase,butbecausethe D! casewasopaqueandLarryhadnoideawhatwasinside,itwillbeharderforLarrytoestablish 0"  thathiscrimewaspredicatedonamistakenreasonablebeliefthatthebriefcasecontained #l! somethingelse(say,papersandpersonaleffects).InMaryland,however,criminaldefendants $X" needonlysatisfyaburdenofproductionwithrespecttodefense;oncetheydoso,theburden $D # shiftstothegovernmenttodisprovethedefensebeyondareasonabledoubt.IfLarrymightbe %0!$ abletosatisfythatrelativelylowburdenherebyarguingheassumedthecasecontainedwhat &"% briefcasesnormallycontain,namely,papersandpersonaleffects,notdrugs.#X|XX X|# '#&   (#'   QUESTION8  6T X DuringJulyandAugust2002,businessesinHarfordCounty,Marylandwereplaguedbya  seriesofarmedrobberies.Intheearlystagesoftheirinvestigation,thelocalpolicegathered t physicalevidence,eyewitnessaccounts,andvideotapeevidence,butwereunabletoidentifya ` suspect. L   X XInlateAugust2002,thepolicearrestedAlfieondrugpossessioncharges.Alfiewas $ t unabletomakebail,andremainedinthelocaljail,pendingtrialinNovember2002.AfterAlfie's  ` arrest,therobberiesstoppedimmediately.Betty,theleaddetectiveontherobberies,noticedthe  L  coincidence,andsuspectedthatAlfiemightbeinvolved.  8   X XInSeptember2002,BettyinterviewedAlfie'slongtimefianceCelia,whoisthemother   ofAlfie'sthreechildren.CeliatoldBettythatAlfiehadadmittedtoCeliathathecommittedthe   robberiestosupporthisdrughabit,andgaveCeliasomeofthecashstolenintherobberiesas   wellasagunthatCeliaclaimedAlfieusedtocommittherobberies.Bettyalsointerviewedthe   ownerofthegunshopwhereCeliaclaimedthatAlfiehadboughtthegun. p  X XInOctober2002,CeliamarriedAlfie.Alfienevermadeanystatementtothepoliceabout H therobberies,andnoneofthephysicalevidencegatheredatthecrimescenesconnectsAlfieto 4 therobberies.  p  X XAlfiewasproperlyindictedforarmedrobberyintheCircuitCourtforHarfordCounty, H Maryland.Attrial: 4  X X X6"4  <DLX6a. TheStatecallsCeliatotestifythatAlfiehadadmittedtocommittingthe   robberies.CeliarefusestotestifyonthegroundsthatshehasrecentlymarriedAlfie.The  StateaskstheJudgetocompelCelia'stestimony.      b. ToprovehermarriagetoAlfie,Celiaproducesacrumpledphotocopyof l hermarriagecertificateforreviewbythetrialjudge.TheStateobjectstotheadmissionof X  thephotocopy. D!  0"  c. TheStatecallsthegunshopownertotestifythatoneofhisclerk'stold #l! himthattheclerksoldaguntoAlfie.Defensecounselobjectstothetestimonyofthegun $X" shopowner. $D #  %0!$ d. AlfiecallshisbrothertotestifythatAlfieisagoodfather.TheState &"% objectstothistestimony. '#&  (#'   X?( 4 <DL4 X? HowshouldtheCourtruleontheseevidentiaryissues,andwhy?Fullyexplainyour )$( answers.  |*%)  X   @ REPRESENTATIVEANSWER1 h+&*  3a Xa. ` CeliadoesnthavetotestifyagainstAlfie.Whileshecannotassertthenarrower @-(, spousecommunicationsprivilege,(whichsheandAlfiebothhold)becausethecommunicationat ,.|)- issueoccurredpriortothemarriage,Celiamayassertthebroadermaritalprivilege.Spousal  privilegemaybeassertedbecausethisisacriminalactandifCeliawishesnottotestifyagainst  herhusband,theStateofMarylandmaynotcompelhertodoso.Itshouldbenotedthough,that  ifCeliawishedtotestify,shecould.Shealoneholdsthebroadermaritalprivilege. t  X Xb. ` Severalhurdlesmustbeovercomeforthephotocopytobeadmissible.Admission L  raisesissuesofauthentication,hearsay,andbestevidence. 8   X X X9%4 4 <DLX91. Authentication!Themarriagecertificatemaybeaselfauthenticating  ` documentprovideditisapublicrecordissuedandsealedbytheState.Ifnot,to  L  introduceit,afoundationmustbelaidtoestablishitsauthenticity.Celiaherselfcould  8  likelytakethestandtotestifytoitsauthenticityherselfandthiswouldprovidesufficient $  evidencethatthedocumentisauthentic.        2. Hearsay!Themarriagecertificateishearsaybecauseitistobeusedto   providethetruthofthematterasserted(thatCeliaandAlfiearemarried).Thus,foritto   comeintoevidence,anexceptionmustapply.Thecertificateshouldqualifyunderthe p publicrecordsexceptiontothehearsayrule. \  H 3. BestEvidenceRule!Photocopiesaresubjecttothebestevidencerule. 4 Assumingthephotocopyisanaccuraterepresentationthefactthatitisaphotocopy  p shouldnotexcludethecertificateonbestevidencegrounds.  \  H Shouldthecertificatefailinanyoftheabovethreegrounds,itwouldnotbe 4 admitted.     X X<( 4 <DL44X< Xc. ` Thecourtwillhavetomakethepreliminarydeterminationofwhetherthegun  shopownermaytestifytohisclerksstatement.Thisstatementisarguablyhearsayasitappears  tobepresentedforthetruthofthematterasserted.Itmayhowevercomeinasnonhearsay(no  exceptionsareapplicable)iftheStatecanconvincetheJudgethatitisintroducingthegunnotto l showthatAlfieboughtagun,butthatbecauseAlfiehadpossessionofagun,hehadthe X  opportunitytocommitanarmedrobbery(admittedly,ashakyargument).Thisevidenceisnot D! likelytocomein.Evenifitsnothearsay,thereareseriousconcernssinceadmissionofthe 0"  testimonyismoreprejudicialthanprobativearguably. #l!  X Xd. ` TheStateshouldbeabletobarthistestimony.WhileAlfie,asacriminal $D # defendant,hastherighttoputhischaracterinissue,itmustbedoneinalimitedway.Hecould %0!$ introduceevidenceofhisgoodcharacterforpeacefulnessinthismatter,becauseitisatrait &"% relevanttothecommissionofarmedrobbery,thecrimecharged.Beingagoodfatherissimply '#& notatraitpertinenttoarmedrobbery (#'  X&    REPRESENTATIVEANSWER2  |*%)   '|*+q Xa. ` TheStatecannotcompelCeliastestimonyimplicatingAlfieintherobberies. T,'+ AlthoughAlfieandCeliawerenotmarriedatthetimeAlfiemadethestatements,spousal @-(, privilegeprotectsCeliafromhavingtotestifytoanystatementsmadetoherinconfidenceduring ,.|)- orbeforethemarriage.SinceAlfieandCeliaarecurrentlymarried,Celiamayinvokethe  spousalprivilegeandnotbeforcedtotestifyagainstherhusband.Theonlypossiblewaythe  StatecouldforceCeliatotestifywereiftheStatecouldshowthemarriagewasenteredinto  simplyforthepurposeofinvokingtheprivilege.Maritalprivilegewouldnotapplyherebecause t theprivilegebelongstoAlfieandonlyprotectsagainstdisclosureofstatementsmadeduringthe ` marriage,nottheengagement. L   X Xb. ` TheStatesobjectiontotheadmissionofthephotocopyshouldbeoverruled.The $ t documentissoughttobeadmittedtoprovethetruthofthematterasserted(thatAlfieandCelia  ` aremarried),andisthereforehearsay.  L   X  Vitalrecords,suchasamarriagecertificate,areadmissibleasseenunderthehearsay $  exception.Providedthatthephotocopycanbeproperlyauthenticated(i.e.,itisacertified,   stampedcopyofthemarriagecertificateoracustodianoftheoriginalcanbeproducedtotestify   astothevalidityofthedocument,thephotocopyshouldbeadmissibleasahearsayexception!a   vitalrecordofmarriage.Idonotbelievethebestevidencerulewouldapplyhere.    Xc. ` Thegunshopownerstestimonycontaining whatoneofhisclerkstoldhimis \ inadmissiblehearsay.TheStateisseekingtohavethegunshopownertestifyastowhat H someoneelsetoldhim(i.e.,thattheclerksoldtheguntoAlfie).Thegunshopowner,whilehe 4 maybereliableandwhiletheevidencemayberelevant,hasnopersonalknowledgeoran  p independentbasisofthisknowledgethathisclerksoldaguntoAlfie.Thetruthofhistestimony  \ dependsonthecredibilityofthemakerofthestatement,theclerk,whoisnottestifying.The H testimonyisinadmissiblehearsay. 4  X Xd. ` Inacriminalcase,theaccusedisgenerallypermittedtoproduceevidenceofthe   defendantsgoodcharactertraitprovideditisrelevanttothecrimecharged.Thetestimonythat  Alfieisa goodfatherdoesnothingtorebutthecharacterimputedtoAlfiebybeingcharged  withrobbery(i.e.,thatAlfieisdishonest,violent,usesweapons).Theproposedtestimonyis  irrelevantastothecrimecharged,andthereisnoevidenceAlfiescharacterhasyetbeen l attackedinanyway.Inthiscasetheprejudiceinadmittingthisirrelevanttestimonyfrom X  defendantsbrotheroutweighsanypossibleprobativevalue.Onecanstillbeagoodfatherand D! commitarmedrobberies. 0"   #l!  $X"  $D #  %0!$  X   X|XXX|  >     X|XX X|  B.` hp x XB>  >݌̌     X|XX X|  #X|XX X|# X|XXX| ,.|)- QUESTION9   ;     X|XX X|  H.` hp x XH;  #X|XX X|W#     X|XXX|;Y݌̌     X|XX X|  #X|XX X|# X|XXX|E+ ` hp x XE<    ?+ {4 <DLX? X|XX X|  <  TombroughtasmallclaimactionagainstJerryintheDistrictCourtofMarylandinPrince  GeorgesCounty,Maryland,foraccountingservicesrenderedtoJerryintheamountof$1,500.Tom  andJerrybothliveandworkinPrinceGeorgesCounty.Jerrycontactedhisattorneytorepresenthim  inthesuit.Intheofficeconferencewithhisattorney,Jerryprovidedthefollowinginformationabout   thecase.Tomsfeesareexcessiveandunreasonable.Tomfailedtoproperlypreparefinancial   statementsforJerrywhichresultedinabusinesslosstoJerryof$27,500.<v݌   Ќ    $ X{4X$  X|XX X|  ?+ ` hp x X?<    ?+ {4 <DLX? X|XX X|  <9  <9݌   Ќ    $ X{4X$  X|XX X|  ?+ ` hp x X??    B.E]` hp x XB X|XX X|  ?    A. ] Basedonthegivenfacts,doesJerryhaveoptionsindecidinginwhichCourtthecase m  willbetried?ExplainindetailwhatresponsivepleadingswillbefiledforJerry;theCourt(s) g  inwhichthosepleadingswillbefiled;andthereasonsforthefilingsofthosepleadingsinthat a  particularCourt(s).? ݌ [  Ќ    ' XE]` X'  X|XX X|          ?+ ` hp x X??    B.E]` hp x XB X|XX X|  ?  B. ] Assumethefollowingadditionalfacts:Jerrybelievesthatseveralaccountantswho O workedforTommustbedeposedinordertogetthefullstoryofthenegligenceofTomin I handingJerrysmatters.Basedonthegivenfacts,inwhichCourt(s)canJerrytakethe C depositions?Explainindetail.?݌ = Ќ    ' XE]` X'  X|XX X|    ?+ ` hp x X?&  9     X|XX X|    9H  REPRESENTATIVEANSWER1 9H atԌ #s Ќ     X|XX X|  '#<    A. ` JerrymaychoosetofileacounterclaimagainstTomforJerrys$27,500lossof K business.IfJerryfilesacounterclaimfor$25,000,thematterwillbemovedoutofsmallclaims 7 courtandmovedontoaregularDistrictCourtdocketpursuanttoRule3701becausethecrossclaim # exceedsthe$2,500limitforsmallclaimsactions.     ` Jerrymaywanttofileasuitfortheentire$27,500indamages.Ifso,hecannotfile  acrossclaimbecausehiscrossclaimexceedsthe$25,000jurisdictionallimitofDistrictCourtunder  3331and4401.Hemay,however,movetohavetheactionagainsthimstayedsothathecanfile o  aseparateactioninCircuitcourtforthe$27,500. [!      ` Anoticeofintenttodefend,identifyingJerrysattorneyshallbefiledwithin15days 3#  ofserviceonJerrytotheDistrictCourt.ItwillbefiledinDistrictCourtbecausethatiswhereToms $o! actionagainstJerryisfiled.IfJerrychoosestofileacrossclaimnotexceeding$25,000thatwill  %[ " befiledinDistrictCourtwithintendaysafterthenoticetodefend.IfJerrywantstofileseparately, %G!# heshouldfileamotiontostaytheactioninDistrictCourtbecausethatiswhereTomssuitagainst &3"$ Jerryis. '#%   B. ` JerrycantakethedepositionsoftheseveralaccountantsifhiscaseisfiledinCircuit )$' CourtorifTomstipulatestothedepositioninwritingifthecaseisinDistrictCourt. *%(    ` IfJerryfilesinCircuitCourtseparately,2401governsdiscoveryandallows k,'* depositions.2411saysanypartymaydeposeaperson. W-(+  C.),    ` IfJerryfilesinregularDistrictCourt,3401governsdiscoveryandallowsfor  depositionsonlybywrittenstipulationofthepartiesandwillnotlikelystipulate.     ` Thereisnopretrialdiscoveryunder3701insmallclaimscourt,soJerrycannot t deposeinDistrictCourtsmallclaims. `   &  9     X|XX X|    9?  REPRESENTATIVEANSWER2 9? atԌ 8  Ќ     X|XX X|  '8 3  A. ` TheDistrictCourthasexclusivejurisdictionoverasmallclaimaction(below  ` $2,500).Section4405.Consequently,Tomssuitfor$1,500wasproperlybroughtinDistrict  L  Court.However,JerrydoeshavetheoptionofstayingtheproceedingsbegunbyTomand  8  commencingactioninCircuitCourt,sincehemayingoodfaithcounterclaimfor$27,500,which $  exceedstheDistrictCourtsmonetaryjurisdictionofbelow$25,000.Section4401(1),3331(f).   IfJerrywishestoremaininDistrictCourt,heshouldfileanoticeofintenttodefend.Section3   307(a).Thisshouldbedonewithin15daysofserviceofthecomplaintagainsthim.Section3   307(b).Heshouldalsocounterclaimforanamountnotexceeding$25,000.Rule3331(a)expressly   allowsacounterclaimexceedingtheamountsoughtinTomsoriginalpleading.Thismustbedone p withintendaysoffilinghisnoticetodefend.Section3331(d).Ifthecounterclaimexceeds$2,500 \ (asislikely),theclerkshalltransfertheactionoutofthesmallclaimsdockettotheregularcivil H actiondocket.Finally,ifJerrywishestosueforthefullamountofhisloss($27,500),hewillhave 4 tomoveforstayoftheactioninDistrictCourtandfilesuitinCircuitCourt.Section3331(f).This  p istheactionthatheshouldtake.  \   B. ` Pretrialdiscoveryisnotpermittedinasmallclaimaction.3701(e).Iftheaction 4 istransferredtotheDistrictCourtsregularcivildocketunder3701(d),Rule3401allows   depositionsifawrittenstipulationisfiledintheaction.IfJerrycommencesanactioninCircuit   Court,Rule2401allowsforfulldiscoverybydeposition,generallywithoutcourtinterference.          #X|XX X|Q#  D!    X|XXX|5   X X|6   6X X65L  #X|X X6X-# YXYXXX|  QUESTION10#X|XXYXY#6X XXX| 5LЦ݌  Ќ6X X X6X X|X X6X   4  5   X X|6   6X X650  50݌̌6X X X6X X|X X6X   5   X X|6   6X X65B  #X|X X6Xo#YXYXXX|Albertowned200acresoffarmlandandtimberontheEastsideofHighway7,whichruns r generallyinanorthsouthdirectioninGarrettCounty,Maryland.In1950Bernardapproached ^ Albertaboutpurchasingtheeasternmost50acresofAlbertslandforthepurposeofbuildinga J smallcabintohuntand getawayfromitall.OnApril1,1950,Albertsoldandconveyedto 6  Bernardthe50acresandconveyedtoBernarda12footwideeasementknownasTreeLine " r Lane.TreeLineLaneextendedapproximatelymileoverAlbertslandandtheeasement  ^ recitedthatitwasforthepurposeofingressandegresstoHighway7.5BƩ݌  J ЌYXYXXYXY X|XXYXY   YXYXX X|5  Y2XYXY6Y2  Y26YXYXY25  5_݌̌YXYXXYXYYXYXXYXY   5  Y2XYXY6Y2  Y26YXYXY25    Duringthefallof1970Albertrelocatedthelast300yardsofTreeLineLanewhereit  "  joinedHighway7,infavorofamoreconvenientaccesstotheHighway.Theoldaccessquickly   grewupwithtreesandbecameimpass