class 25

Question 1

criminal direct

Answer 1

an outburst or behavior that causes the judge to stop or interrupt the proceeding. direct because it is happening in front of the judge

Question 2

criminal indirect

Answer 2

interruption to a court proceeding that does not happen in view of the judge

Question 3

collateral bar rule

Answer 3

you can’t say the injunction is unlawful as a defense to contempt- refusal to comply with court order

Question 4

Contempt

Answer 4

contempt is a courts power to enforce its own orders. when someone disobeys a courts order for an equitable remedy, the consequence is that they can be found in contempt of court and face a sanction.

Question 5

civil contempt

Answer 5

1. the underlying order sets forth an ambiguous command;
2. D violated that command;
3. D violation was significant- it did not comply with the order; and
4. D failed to take steps to reasonably and diligently comply with the order

Question 6

purge clause

Answer 6

in an ambiguous situation, its more likely to be civil than criminal because of the purge clause

Question 7

jury trials

Answer 7

legal remedies/ money damages are heard by juries
equitable issues are heard by a judge

Question 8

federal courts

Answer 8

prioritize jury trials.
the facts and issues necessary to determine whether to award the legal remedy must first be decided by a jury. anything that is related to the legal remedy will be decided by the jury. after the facts and legal remedy are decided first, then the judge comes in and makes an equitable determination

Question 9

state courts

Answer 9

prioritize equitable claims
if the remedy is mostly equitable then judge will make the determination on the equitable issues first (including the merits of the action) with the jury possibly coming in later to resolve any remaining non-incidental legal remedies.

Question 10

Anything that the first fact finder determines are binding on the second fact finder

Question 11

Hoopes v. Dolan

Answer 11

fighting over a parking lot.
sued to determine rights- D says this is equitable estoppel ( for allowing joint use for years)
state court- jury first. jury said P. then judge decides the equitable stuff. judge ignores the jury ruling and finds for the D. P appeals. judge is supposed to be bound by the findings of the jury.
equitable defense was based on separate facts that the jury had not dealt with.