Civil Litigation Stages - Assignment Example

Lecturer Final Political Science Exam Question 3: Civil Litigation Stages Civil litigation entails lawsuit. This lawsuit enables oneparty (complainant) to seek damages against the other party (defendant). Damages comprise different aspects; for instance, money or modification of certain conduct (Labunski 216). An example of lawsuit is; suing due to breach of employment contract. Civil litigation does not entail criminal matters; hence the losing party is not jailed, but pays only damages. First civil litigation stage is pleading. Pleading stage entails filing complaint against the defendant. The defendant is allowed to contest some aspects of the complaint; like frivolous issues illustrated by complainant. The court determines is complaint has merit, or is without merit. Second litigation stage is discovery. Discovery entails analyzing the evidence of each party in the dispute. Questions are asked on the supporting documents of both the petitioner and the defendant. After closure of discover, the third civil litigation stage is the summary judgment motion. The summary judgment motion illustrates arguments of the defendant that the plaintiff’s evidence does not support the claim. In the summary judgment process, the court considers evidence of the plaintiff, and the law. If the plaintiff succeeds in the summary judgment motion, the trial stage is initiated. But just before the trial, the parties are sent to arbitration hearing, where the mediator pushes for agreement of the parties. This is referred to as settlement conference. If settlement is not achieved, the court authorizes full trial of the case (Labunski 219). Question 4: Grand Jury Grand jury entails legal institution that is enabled to perform official proceedings of investigating or analyzing potential criminal activities; and to study if criminal charges will be brought. The grand jury can initiate production of documents, and also sworn witness testimony, before it. The grand jury and the courts are separate and independent institutions. Grand juries are responsible for performing investigatory and also accusatory duties. Investigatory responsibilities of the grand jury entail obtaining and analyzing evidence, and also hearing sworn witnesses testimonies that are before it. The accusatory function of the grand jury determines if one or more individuals committed offences within appropriate district court jurisdiction. Grand jury in the United States comprises between 16 and 23 citizens. The grand jury has more jurors than the trial jury (Levy 76). During early decades in the United States of America, grand juries performed significant roles in issues affecting the public. In that duration, counties adhered to traditional practices of making decisions through a minimum of twelve jurors (Maier 104). Any citizen is allowed to directly present a matter to the grand jury; for instance, repairs on public works, inappropriate conduct of public officials, and crime complaints. Grand juries can also perform their investigations, into public issues. During that era, majority of criminal prosecutions were done by private parties like law enforcement officers, lawyers, and even laymen. If the criminal issue has adequate evidence and is within appropriate jurisdiction, the grand jury authorizes the complainant to exercise the power of the attorney in representing the state during the criminal case. Question5: Constitution Rights The constitutional rights resulting from the arrest example are; rights against inappropriate seizures or searches, right against unfair legal practices, and the rights in the criminal prosecution process. The right to appropriate seizure and search process of the suspects, contained in the fourth amendment, was not respected (Maier 154). This is because the action by Officer Jones was not judicially sanctioned. The right to fair legal treatment, illustrated in the Fifth Amendment, was abused by Officer Jones. This is because the Due Process Clause was not adhered to during arrest of the suspects. Fair criminal prosecution process, illustrated in the Sixth Amendment, was not adhered to by Officer Jones. This is because he did not give the suspects the opportunity to consult their lowers during questioning, lawyer presence is very important during interrogations. Officer Jones did not adhere to the constitution during the arrest. This is because he did not give the suspects the opportunity to consult their lawyers during interrogations, as provided for in the sixth amendment (Barry 195). The officer also did not adhere to the appropriate procedures for seizure and search. This is because he did no obtain a warranty that is judicially sanctioned, and based on sufficient probable cause. There are several exceptions to the search and seizure protection legislation; for example voluntary search initiated by the suspect is voluntary, legally binding, and evidence produced from it is legally binding. Officer Jones did not adhere to the constitution by patting the suspects. This is because he did not seek the consent of the suspects. Also, the lawyers for the suspects were not present to witness the activity. Furthermore, any evidence collected during the activity cannot be used in the court, hence not legally binding because there was no adequate probable cause. Question 6: Probable Cause in Law Probable cause in the United States criminal law entails the level which an agent of the law obtains warrant for making arrests or performing property and property search, when analysis of criminal charges is being conducted. It also determines the standard that the grand jury illustrates is a crime (Wood 60). The probable cause term originates from the U. S. constitution’s fourth amendment. The fourth amendment illustrates that the individuals’ rights to be secure, against inappropriate seizures and searches, must not be violated. Warrants must only be issued through probable cause based on oaths and affirmation. Probable in legal aspects relates to statistical probability or general common behavior. Probable cause is applied in the Fifth Amendment because it protects the rights of the defendant during the entire trial process. All defendants enjoy the rights of legal assistance during custodial interrogations (Barry 81). The counsel of the defendant must be present during questioning by the law enforcement officers. This ensures protection of the defendant against self incrimination. The probable cause also ensures that a person is not tried more than once, for the same crime. Probable cause is applicable in the sixth amendment because it ensures legal counsel to the defendant during the entire trial process. The legal representation impact is greater and broader in the sixth amendment than the Fifth Amendment. This is because the probable cause aims at providing evidence which can properly sustain a trial in the court of law. Hence, the defendant must be given enough opportunity for defense through the counsels (Maier 127). For instance, it is the right of any defendant, through his/her lawyers, to appeal against decisions of lower courts. Works Cited Barry, Donald. The legal foundations of public administration. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Labunski, Richard. James Madison and the struggle for the Bill of Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2006. Print. Levy, Leonard. Seasoned Judgments: The American Constitution, Rights, and History. NJ: Transaction Publishers. 2005. Print. Maier, Pauline. Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787–1788. NY: Simon and Schuster. 2010. Print. Wood, Gordon. Empire of Liberty: A History of the Early Republic, 1789–1815. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2009. Print. Read More