Browse through the curated selection of our completed assessments to get a sense of the quality and depth of our work. Whether you need guidance, inspiration, or just want to evaluate our work, this page is your go-to resource.
To: Supervisor/Firm Partner
Re: Assessment of Al Jones’s Utility Easement
Should the city’s dispute go to trial, the case will be heard in the state court. The court that would hear the case depends on the dollar amount. Either a limited jurisdiction trial court for smaller amounts of money, or general jurisdiction trial court would be the way to go if the dollar amount is large (Cheeseman, 2007). Because this case involves an easement for a city utility line, the dollar amount is likely going to be a large sum of money and would go to trial in a general jurisdiction trial court.[I’m not sure an action involving an easement for a utility line automatically means a large sum of money, which by the way, I’m assuming you’re talking about possible damages, since you don’t specifically state so. Additionally, this is not overally helpful. You should describe what this figure is (even if it’s a ballpark number) that you consider to be large.] If either of the parties find the ruling of the general jurisdiction trial court to be in error or a correction of the previous court’s verdict is necessary, the verdict can be appealed. An appeal is taken to an intermediate appellate court in which only the evidence and testimony from the previous court is heard (Cheeseman, 2007). An appeal can be made on the intermediate appellate court’s judgment to the highest state court also known as the State Supreme Court, and finally if that decision is found inadequate the highest court that can hear a case is the Supreme Court (Cheeseman, 2007).
If the adjacent landowner sues for damages to property and trespassing, the fact that the landowner is a citizen of Switzerland can be a case for the federal courts to hear. Proceedings involving a citizen of a state and a citizen of a foreign country are a type of jurisdiction called diversity of citizenship that involves the federal courts (Cheeseman, 2007, p. 24). The federal court system begins with the U.S. district courts in which the judge, and sometimes jury, will hear the opening statements made by the attorneys, the plaintiff’s case, followed by the defendant’s case, the rebuttal, the closing arguments, and finally the entry of judgment.[This is also true in state court generally.] If one of the parties disagrees with the judgment the next court in the federal court system is the U.S. court of appeals and if that judgment is in need of an appeal the final court is again the United States Supreme Court (Cheeseman, 2007). [Start a new paragraph here.] The case could also be tried in a state court system; that depends on whether the landowner brings the case to the federal courts or the state court system. Concurrent jurisdiction refers to a jurisdiction that allows a trial to be heard in more than one court (Cheeseman, 2007). If the plaintiff does bring the case to a state court system, Al Jones the client, have a choice of moving the case to the federal court system. Either way, the venue for the trial will be held in a court that is closest to the site that the dispute happened (Cheeseman, 2008, p. 27).
Al Jones may not have overseen the utility easement installation, which would make him only indirectly responsible. Utility easements are a part of real estate law, so the State courts could hear this case out; however, with the foreign citizenship of the defendant, it could end up in federal courts.
Several courts for the various types of cases that need to enter the judicial system exist. Each has a different level of authority. To enter the court system with the situation ‘Jones has found himself in is the court that is chosen must have in rem jurisdiction, jurisdiction over the property at issue of the lawsuit, to hear the case. It must also be brought to the proper venue. The venue requires lawsuits to be heard by the court with jurisdiction nearest the location in which the incident occurred or where the parties reside.
This case could be held in the federal court system with the fact that the defendant is of a Switzerland citizenship. With the easement involved, it could easily come to over $75,000, which is a requirement to have it sent through the federal system. Diversity of citizenship is what this would be called. These are cases between (i) citizens of different states, (ii) a citizen of a state and a citizen or subject of a foreign country, and (iii) a citizen of a state and a foreign country where a foreign country is the plaintiff. Federal courts must apply the appropriate state law in such cases (Cheeseman, 2007).
The first stage in bringing the case to review in a civil court is to contest the plaintiff’s pleading. Filing an answer to the plaintiff’s requires filing the appropriate paperwork with the courts to dispute the claims made against Al Jones’ business (Cheeseman, 2007).
Second, pretrial procedure allows each party to gather facts from the other party involved. This stage is the discovery stage. Al Jones’ lawyers have the right to interrogate the plaintiff’s witnesses prior to a trial and gather the documents needed to display as evidence during the trial (Cheeseman, 2007).
When the discovery stage is complete, the parties involved have one of two options. The first option is to ask for a pretrial motion in which the judge decides to case based on the documents and evidence gathered during the discovery stage. The second option is to take the lawsuit to trial. If the lawsuit goes to trial, the jury’s verdict will decide the outcome of the case. However, an appeal can be made if the verdict is not the desired response (Cheeseman, 2007).
Our legal team is ready to analyze, identify, and give Al Jones all the required legal information pertaining to the comparison of the civil and criminal aspect of the situation. Civil cases usually involve private disputes between persons or organizations. Criminal cases involve an action that is considered to be harmful to society. We will elaborate the key differences between civil and criminal cases. In this case, the easement on the subdivision not belonging to Al Jones is as follows: Property easement law describes the rights to use some part of a property for a specific purpose, types of easements, and easements versus right of way. A survey will define the property lines to hopefully any questions of land ownership or the need to file for prescriptive easements. Entering the civil aspect of this, civil suits are brought in both state and federal courts. An example of a civil case in a state court would be if a citizen (including a corporation) sued another citizen for not living up to a contract. Individuals, corporations, and the federal government can also bring civil suits in federal court claiming violations of federal statutes or constitutional rights.
Many unanswered questions revolving around this situation exist; the other private party owner may not have any reason to sue, if his property does not indicate “private property” signs. They have not made any indications to Al Jones to keep off the property. In the event any land owner shall construct or place any improvements on any lot without first obtaining the prior written consent of the Developer, or other such consents as required by law, or varies the materials or construction proposed after construction begins without the prior written consent of the developer, said owner shall be liable to the Developer for a liquidated damages penalty in the amount of $3,000.00. Nothing herein contained is intended to serve as a waiver of the undersigned or any other lot owner’s rights to require full compliance with these restrictions and payment of such penalty shall not relieve said lot owner from compliance with these restrictions (Godfrey, n.a).
The reality of this case is that Al Jones has violated property rights laws. The right of the plaintiff to sue Al Jones is based on this fact. When laws are broken, even if unintentional such as this case, there are still penalties to pay. This law firm is suggesting that Al Jones has a high risk of losing this case unless an agreed upon decision can be settled between both the plaintiff and the defendant.
As stated above, this could turn out to be a lengthy and costly process if a trial were to occur. This law firm wants to recommend an alternative dispute resolution. It is the belief of this law firm that the intrusion of the easement was unintentional. The law firm wants to recommend a mediator who can listen to both sides of the argument from both the plaintiff and the defendant. The mediation process would allow both parties the opportunity to share their concerns, and hopefully settle the dispute in a manner that pleases both parties and is less costly of time and money.
Cheeseman., H. R. (2007). The Legal Environment of Business and Online Commerce: Business Ethics, E-Commerce, Regulatory, and International Issues (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Findlaw. (2009). CivilCasesvs.CriminalCasesKeyDifferences. Retrieved
from http://www.public.indlaw.com
Godfrey,L. (n.a.). APlanned Residential Subdivision. Retrieved from http://www.leegodfrey.com
RealEstateLawyers. (n.a.). Land/PropertyEasemenLaws. Retrievedfromhttp://www.realestatelawyers.com
All orders at our writing service are delivered exceptionally for research purposes.
