Lesson Viewed
NEPA Basics
This exercise reviews the basic structure and requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, the first major federal environmental law.
This exercise reviews the basic structure and requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, the first major federal environmental law.
The New Ranch lesson is the successor to the Ranch lesson. As with the Ranch, the New Ranch lesson leads students through the steps necessary to perfecting a security interest under Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) in a multi-state contact situation. The exercise also assists students to understand many other provisions of Article 9, including those dealing with classification of collateral and those governing the place of filing within a particular state.
This lesson covers emerging issues of assisted reproduction technologies. Most specifically, it explores issues of parental rights on both a constitutional and state level. Topics covered include artificial insemination, surrogacy, and the status of un-implanted pre-embryos when the parties disagree about implantation. It does not cover post-partum conception. The lesson includes the issue of lesbian partners when one provides the egg and the other is the gestational mother but it does not cover other issues of lesbian parenthood.
This lesson covers the availability of non-economic damages; evidentiary issues in proving these damages; and issues in the argument to the jury of these damages. This lesson gives you an opportunity to explore the "how to" of non-economic damages, particularly damages for pain and suffering and mental or emotional distress. The lesson is designed for upper-level students in remedies, advanced torts, or trial practice courses. Students should have some basic knowledge of both tort law and evidence law. First-year students may find the lesson accessible by making use of the pop-up screens providing background on concepts and rules.
This lesson focuses on one of the factual inquiries underlying the legal determination of nonobviousness: the scope and content of the prior art. It assumes that you are familiar with the patentability requirement of novelty under the pre-AIA version of 35 U.S.C. § 102 and with the basic framework of the obviousness analysis. If you would like a review of the basic framework for determining obviousness, you may want to do the lesson on "Basic Concepts of Nonobviousness" before you complete this lesson. After completing this lesson you should have a better understanding of how to determine the scope and content of the prior art so as to assess obviousness.
This lesson works through the details of patent law's novelty requirement as set out in the pre-AIA version of Section 102(a) of the Patent Act. It also briefly covers the pre-AIA version of Section 102(e) as well as the concept of inventorship. It does not deal with the statutory bars of pre-AIA Section 102(b).
This lesson can serve as an introduction or review of the way in which "secondary considerations" are used in assessing the nonobviousness requirement in patent law. The lesson assumes a basic familiarity with the nonobviousness doctrine. Before doing this lesson, students may wish to review the lesson dealing with Basic Concepts of Nonobviousness. Other aspects of the nonobviousness doctrine are covered in the lesson dealing with Scope and Content of the Prior Art. Students may do this lesson either before or after that lesson.
In addition to the limitations imposed upon interrogations by Miranda, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel also constrain law enforcement authority in the interrogation context. This lesson will discuss those additional constitutional limitations. Although it isn't necessary to have mastered the Miranda limitations at this point, some familiarity with those standards will be helpful.
This lesson is an analytical guide to the study of two major aspects of evidence: relevance and hearsay. The vehicle used by this guide is a step by step, nine question analysis, applicable to any admissibility of evidence problem. This lesson should help one determine whether any item of evidence is admissible under the rules of evidence pertaining to relevance and hearsay. The answers to the first four questions determine whether any item of proffered evidence is admissible under the two components of relevancy: logical and legal relevancy.
This lesson reviews the threshold principles of ownership by analyzing the "works made for hire" doctrine codified in the Copyright Act of 1976.
A hundred years ago, a law professor said of the parol evidence rule, "There are few things darker than this or fuller of subtle difficulties." Many students and professionals who have studied the rule would agree with that assessment. Hopefully this exercise will illuminate the rule. It does so by examining the functions served by the rule, taking the user through a series of questions that can be used to resolve most issues involving the application of the rule. The Uniform Commercial Code enactment of the rule is examined in detail.
This lesson deals with the dissociation of partners under the Revised Uniform Partnership Act (RUPA). It discusses the events that result in dissociation under Section 601 of the RUPA, whether dissociation is wrongful or not, and touches on the consequences of wrongful dissociation.