Dynamic Business Law: The Essentials - Essay Example

Sufficient Minimum Contacts means that the defendant must have taken actions purposefully directed towards a resident or organization within the Forum State. Therefore, bearing in mind the Della and Berry did business with an Indiana client, Sufficient Minimum Contacts were established. The Indiana court can exercise jurisdiction over the defendant's party. In Rem Jurisdiction refers to the exercise of power by the court over property or status against a defendant with whom the court does not have In Personam Jurisdiction. It applies in this case because the complainant aims at suing an out-of-state business.

Moreover, in 1(c), the Indiana client cannot file a federal suit. According to Concurrent Federal Jurisdiction, the federal courts can hear cases in instances of diversity of citizenship (the parties involved are citizens of different States or Non-citizens of the United States) whereby the claim amounts to the value of money exceeding $75, 000. The case filed by the Indiana client would be too minor to be heard in a federal court. In 2 (a), the defendant can apply several written responses that include; General Denial response to say that there is nothing in the complaint as true, a Demurrer response telling the court that the complaint is insufficient, or a Motion to Strike response that requests the court to remove something out of the complaint.

In 2 (b), there are several discovery forms that can be used including; deposition (asking a witness or party to respond to questions orally under oath in presence of a court reporter), interrogatives (written questions sent to a party to answer in writing under oath), and a request for admission (a request sent to a party to admit to certain facts). In 2 (c), the final pretrial conference is held to outline the issues of the case and set timeframes for procedural matters and the legal process. In scenario 3 (a), the Common Pleas Court has the jurisdiction to hear the case because it involves parties with whom it has Personal jurisdiction according to the Long Arm Statute, and the claim is above the maximum limit set for Municipal Court. In 3 (b), the Municipal Court has the jurisdiction to hear the case because it involves parties with whom it has In Personam Jurisdiction and the claim does not exceed $ 15,000. In 3 (c), the Municipal Court has the jurisdiction over the case because it involves parties with whom it has In Personam Jurisdiction and the claim does not meet the minimum limit to be heard by Common Pleas Court. In 3 (d), the Common Pleas Court has jurisdiction over the case because it involves parties of diverse citizenship and the claim is above the maximum limit set for Municipal Court (Browne et.al, 21).

In 4 (a), there are several threshold requirements that have to be met that include; the threshold for standing (ascertaining whether the plaintiff is actually a real party of the case), case, and controversy (ascertaining whether the plaintiff has a justifiable case against the defendant), and ripeness (ascertaining whether a case has matured into a controversy that is worthy to be adjudicated). Lastly, in 4 (b), the plaintiff has met the standing threshold requirement because the debt collector’s calls affect the welfare of the Whataburger organization. Secondly, the case and controversy threshold requirement is also met because the defendant has violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Nevertheless, the ripeness threshold requirement has also been met because the defendant has continued to make phone calls to the debtor at the workplace even after receiving the cease-and-desist letter from the organization. It means that a legal process should be administered to resolve the problem before it causes more harm to the plaintiff.