Civil Procedure Keyed to Coundback
0 of 5 questions completed
You have already completed the quiz before. Hence you can not start it again.
Quiz is loading…
You must sign in or sign up to start the quiz.
You have to pass the previous Module’s quiz in order to start this quiz:
you have successfully completed the quiz.
A national fast food franchisor filed an action against one of its franchisees, alleging breach of contract. Both parties are corporations. The franchisor alleged that the franchisee had failed to pay the franchisor the requisite percentage of the franchisee’s profits as required by the franchise contract. The franchisor timely served on the franchisee corporation a notice of deposition, which named the franchisee corporation as the deponent and which stated that the deposition would inquire into the accounting methods and accounting records of the franchisee corporation.
How should the defendant franchisee corporation respond to the fact that the notice of deposition does not name a person to be deposed?CorrectIncorrect
The plaintiff filed a negligence action against the defendant to recover compensatory damages for injuries sustained in a car accident. The defendant believes that the plaintiff’s key witness has such poor eyesight that she could not possibly have seen the things that she claims to have seen.
May the defendant require the witness to undergo an eye exam as part of discovery?CorrectIncorrect
The driver of a car filed a civil action in federal district court against the owner and operator of a truck that collided with her vehicle. The driver has reason to believe that the truck was serviced at a particular auto repair shop shortly before the accident. The driver wants to see any records the repair shop has regarding the truck’s servicing because a failure to properly service the truck could help prove the truck owner’s liability. The driver requested the service records from the truck owner, but the truck owner has no service records in his possession.
Can the driver obtain the truck’s service records from the repair shop?CorrectIncorrect
A patron at a private park was injured while operating a small boat he rented from the park. The patron subsequently filed a civil tort action against the park in federal district court, seeking to recover compensatory damages for the injury.
Prior to trial, the park took the deposition of a witness, another visitor to the park who saw the patron’s accident. The park properly served notice of the deposition on all parties, and all parties were represented at the deposition. The deposition took place in the witness’s home town, which is 140 miles from the park and the court where the action is pending. At the time of trial, the witness is at home, and the park’s attorney seeks to read the witness’s deposition testimony into evidence. The attorney for the plaintiff patron objects to the use of the witness’s deposition.
May the park present the depositions into evidence?CorrectIncorrect
The plaintiff and defendant in a negligence action filed in federal district court were in a two-car accident. The defendant’s attorney properly gave notice of and commenced a deposition of an eyewitness to the accident. Attorneys for both parties were present at the deposition. During the deposition, the defendant’s attorney asked the witness a leading question, and the plaintiff’s attorney did not object. At the time of trial, the eyewitness was out of the country. Therefore, the defendant’s attorney sought to read a portion of the witness’s deposition testimony into evidence at trial, including the leading question and the witness’s response to it. The plaintiff’s attorney objected at trial to the reading of the leading question and the witness’s response.
Is the leading question and response properly admissible in evidence at trial?CorrectIncorrect