Truean: Yeah, sorry, I didn't think precedent was as strictly binding in the US as it apparently is. It's at least more complicated than I thought, anyway. What distinguishes between precedent that's binding and precedent that isn't, though? After all, I know I've seen examples of court cases that rule different ways on basically the same issue.
Geography, Authority, Similar Facts in the Case you are Citing: To summarize, jurisdiction and what I'd characterize as "chain of authority" to make it easier.
Keep in mind that if you can "distinguish" one case from another on the facts, that means you can argue the case someone is trying to say is binding is inapplicable due to a factual difference.
Example of Distinguishing a Cited Case on Different Facts:
"Your Honor, the case, State v. Matherson, the State cites is inapplicable to this case and its rule is not binding on this court. In that case, the defendant knowingly stole, took possession of, a car by fraud or deceit, from a person he did not know with no intent to return it. Here, this defendant, at worst made a mistake if he did anything wrong, this car belonged to a friend, whom he had known for years, with a history of loaning that car to him for money, the money for using the car was always paid after the fact, and the defendant fully intended to return the car as he had in the past. Thus, due to these factual differences, the Matherson presumption of defendant's knowledge and intention to steal if he possesses the car should not be applied in this case to this defendant under these facts.
A.) Generally, unless you can distinguish it somehow, like above,
State Trial Court is bound by:
1.) Any and all precedent from the U.S. Supreme Court.
2.) Any and all precedent from the State Supreme Court of its own state.
3.) Any and all precedent from the appellate court it is immediately under (there are different geographical appellate courts for different areas of the state and they are numbered. All trial courts belong under the rule of a regional state appellate court
http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/JudSystem/districtCourts/default.asp,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_District_Courts_of_Appeals )
B.) Generally, unless you can distinguish it somehow, like above,
Federal District Court (federal trial court) is bound by:
1.) Any and all precedent from the U.S. Supreme Court.
2.) Any and all precedent from the federal circuit (appellate) court it is immediately under. (Much like state courts, the U.S. is divided into regions for purposes of the federal courts. The same rule applies via geographic location
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_district_court)
This means that if you look at the maps and you are in the first (1st) circuit or appeals district, the stuff from the second (2) circuit or appeals district (or any other) is only persuasive and not binding. Persuasive means the court may choose to use it if you can convince the judge it makes sense to and that the judge has authority to do so (that it does not conflict with binding precedent).
Civil Procedure is an entire yearlong course in law school and it is very complex. There are other, separate, issues as to where a case is heard. Here are some of them.
Venue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venue_%28law%29Subject Matter Jurisdiction:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subject_Matter_JurisdictionSo uh... how exactly does on "operate" a car, then?
Incidentally, there's something of a movement in Britain to properly define what "libel" is, incidentally, since currently the law is pretty much being made up by one particular judge.
O dear god, please don't. I'm not remotely joking that it was 7 single spaced pages to explain it to the prosecutor. I never want to look at it again. It was absolutely asinine . I will say that:
"Operate" included, but somehow was not limited to:Driving "Duh"
Starting by means of the ignition or improvisation ("Hot Wiring")
Use of the radio or other features
Turning on the headlights
Fueling and Refueling (but not performing maintenance)
*Shiver*
I only cared because OVI, (Operating Vehicle Intoxicated or formerly DUI) was specifically banned from the diversion program i was trying to get the kid into. The kid was charged with CVI (Controlling Vehicle Intoxicated), which is a step or two down from an OVI.
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4511.194. It includes having possession of the keys on your person (like in your pocket or something) and being in the car's driver seat, while you are drunk. You specifically aren't driving the car in this case just sitting in it drunk. It's a first degree misdemeanor which can be punished by up to 6 months in prison.
The prosecutor said "Control," "Operate" what's the difference? He isn't eligible and has to go to trial like everyone else..... Basically, here's a real reason why my firm sometimes has to charge more for cases taking longer:
The Prosecutor is having a bad day and I have to deal with it somehow when he takes it out on you and I. Thankfully, the kid was doing none of the things for "operating" and so he got the easy way out. He was essentially sitting in a dark parked car with his girlfriend in the driver's seat with the keys in his pocket while drunk off his ass. I'll leave the rest to you....
He was also charged with underage intoxication, which no one had the slightest argument he didn't do. The prosecutor didn't give a shit and thought it was an open and shut case, and he was right. Question, are you under 21? Yes. Question, Are you Drunk? Yes. Guilty.... That and the CVI and his asshole parents won't pay when he somehow got out of it...? Awwwww Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu.......... Hence the suing for fees! Grumble mumble grumble grumble rumble mumble.
Author
Topic: Chill and Relaxed Progressive Irritation and Annoyance Thread (Read 880520 times)