Power and Jurisdictional Authority - Essay Example

Case The of Nevada does not have an existing ‘Intermediate Appellate Court’ (Court of Appeals) today although efforts are being made to create one. Nevada’s State Supreme Court stands in the breach as default ‘Court of Appeals’ for all appeals (final resort) with an overburdened workload. It is important to note: The “extraordinary merit” stipulation in this case (Case #1) must be part of the record of the trial court that the case was heard in otherwise, in Nevada, the evidence is not reviewable by the court.

If the merit exists on the ‘record’ then a filing to the Nevada State Supreme Court is in order. A ‘motion to reconsider’ may be filed with the existing court of record (in Nevada…there does not exist an Appellate or Intermediate Court) but, assuming the complaint that a litigant offers to the court post-trial (judicial finding) is new, as in “overlooked”, and part of the original ‘court record’, a ‘motion to reconsider is allowed in post-trial brief or ‘compelling new evidence’ with respect to a motion.

If the company that I am litigating against conducts any business across state lines the potential to file the case in the 9th Federal District Court may be in order. This filing with the 9th District is allowable if the business in question conducts its particular business affairs beyond state boundaries. This ‘Interstate Business’ may be deemed as ‘Federal’ using the Commerce Act (Commerce Clause/Sherman Act) (U.S. vs Lopez) or any other associated “Interstate” activity. Federal Magistrate Court (the first level of federal appeal) would not be an allowable Court for appeal because the sum of the amount being litigated-$1,000,000- is more than the ceiling price amount allowable by law for a Magistrate Court ($10,000.00). The 9th Federal District Court would be the proper venue of choice (if the case is considered federal) for this complaint.

Case #2 The “nature” of diversity jurisdiction is much more complicated than the cross-border civil matter implies (two people from different states in a car wreck). Diversity jurisdiction, according to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, insists that a Federal Court may be the venue of choice legally of this case; but not because two people from different states are involved. the Federal venue is limited with respect to State Laws of the competing states. A federal court might ‘house’ the proceedings but the federal rulings cannot extend beyond the parameters of the two state’s laws according to diversity jurisdiction.

Often, especially in civil damage cases, one state may have limitations according to damages to be prescribed. If this is the case, the terms ‘Forum Shopping’ or ‘Forum Non-Conveniens’ would most likely apply and be the primary reason for diversity jurisdiction (federal). ‘Forum Shopping’ is when litigant and/or counsel would find a less convenient (non-conveniens) forum to file an action (example: California driver hit in California by New Mexico resident files the case in New Mexico because the procedure or potential ‘awards’ are better for the filing litigant in New Mexico).

A federal court would be the necessary ‘Diversity Jurisdiction’ forum levelling the playing field of competing interests from either, or both, litigants. The federal court, in this example, would be an unbiased ‘Arbiter’ with competing state’s policies, laws and procedures but subject to applicable state laws. Case #3No, the process of appeal is quite different than counsel has claimed. Let us take the process into account from the beginning of the process of a ‘denied benefit’ ruling from the Social Security Administration.

The Social Security Act (1939) along with the Social Security Administration’s protocol sets forth the procedures with respect to remedy or recovery of my benefit. The three stages of appeals available to a social security claimant are: 1) General Administrative Review Process (usually completed in the state of residence of the claimant), 2) Administrative Repeals Process (stage after ‘denied benefit’ again is the finding) and 3) Hearings and Appeals Process (initiated and instructed by the Social Security Act of 1939).

The hearing process does not infer a guarantee of relief with denied benefits claims only that the process must be followed accordingly to the law. At the end of each stage of the appeals process, the claimant (me) is urged to file a civil suit in Federal court or, continue through the process until the third stage is completed. After the third stage (Hearings and Appeals Process), the prompt from the Social Security Administration and case-law is for relief through civil suit of a Federal court.

The reasoning behind this civil relief through the Federal court sound since although the Social Security Administration operate through local, county and state municipalities, the action of the Social Security Amendments (Act) of 1939 make the interpretations of procedural actions of the Social Security Administration a Constitutional-Federal matter for appeals. ( this Social Security explanation is reinforced through Supreme Court decisions, the Social Security Act (1939) and the Social Security Administration’s direct protocol)