State of Confusion
October 20, 2010
This paper will review and discuss a case involving a statute that the State of Confusion has enacted upon. This particular statute applies to all truck and towing trailers that use this state’s highways. Trucks and towing trailers are to have a B-type hitch installed on their units in order to access Confusion’s highways or face having to drive an alternate route around the state. If a trucking company fails to comply with this said statute in the state of Confusion, they can stand to face legal action. Although the federal government has not made an attempt to regulate this statute, Tanya Tucker is still faced with the dilemma of additional expenses because of this statute. Jurisdiction over a suit filed by Tanya will be discussed as well as if this statute is even constitutional. If Tanya decides to file a civil suit as well, we will determine what steps she may need to take to further its process.
For starters, Tanya Tucker’s lawsuit will go before the Federal District Court (FDC).
The FDC will have jurisdiction over this particular suit because this court system hears cases that involve disputes or controversies between two or more states. This suit will be heard to determine if the state of Confusion is in violation of the interstate commerce Clause. This clause gives the federal government the authority to regulate interstate commerce. Because the state of Confusion is requiring all trucks and towing trailers to use this particular towing hitch, this statute will cause problems within the Interstate Commerce Clause.
... on the State of Confusions state statute as well as follow the Commerce Powers as defined by the US Constitution. Legal Issues Tanya Truckers ... will side in favor of Tanya Trucker. The State of Confusion is discriminating against all trucks and towing trailers by forcing them to ... resolve a number of issues before the costly issue of suit follows. Standing Standing is one party asserting a claim ...
According to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution, it states that this clause is “To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” (Constitution of the U.S.) This means that Congress has the right to regulate commerce in order to make certain that interstate commerce is free from local restraints imposed by various states. The statute is unconstitutional because it forces truckers and towers to purchase the hitch solely from one manufacturer within the state of Confusion only. Anyone wishing to pass through this state, such as Tanya Tucker, is required to purchase this B-type hitch. The federal government has not made any type of effort to nationalize these types of hitches, therefore the FDC may force the state to relinquish the burden this statute forces on many truck and towing drivers. Based on the facts of the case, although this statute applies to those traveling within the state lines, it also applies to those out of state drivers that need to pass through Confusion as well. This law imposes an undue hardship amongst truckers and towers causing it to affect the free flow of trade that is protected by the Commerce Clause. The manufacturer that makes these B-type hitches are at risk of being a monopoly because they haven’t left any room for competition for other manufacturers to be able to make the same parts. This is another reason why this statute can be deemed unconstitutional.
By utilizing the Commerce Clause stated within the Constitution and with proof of its violation, Tanya Tucker can prevail in her lawsuit because trucking and towing companies are key components within the states that provide commerce. It is unconstitutional to force an undue hardship on anyone especially since the statute clearly restrains the Interstate Commerce Clause.
... about their importance, Amazon.com and many other e.commerce companies are leveraging patents to protect their innovations and sustain ... in high repeat customer purchase surpassing 66 per cent of orders (Machlis, 1998). Enders and Jelassi (1999) provided examples to ... site (Armstrong, 1999). Moreover, in October 1988, Wal-Mart filed a lawsuit against Amazon.com alleging violations of trade secrets ...
The steps that Tanya will need to take in order to file a civil suit are, first, file a complaint against the state of Confusion explaining why she feels there B-type hitch statute is unconstitutional. She is the plaintiff in this case and the state of Confusion is the defendant. She will then need to have the defendant served with the complaint and they will then need to file an answer to the complaint. The defendant will have 30 days to file an answer to the complaint order or they will then face a default judgment which is simply an order where the judge automatically favors the plaintiff because the defendant has basically forfeited on the said judgment order. A motion of discovery will then need to be filed in order to process any witness statements, any necessary evidence, documentation, etc. Mediation between the two parties will take place at this time to try and come to a resolution. If a resolution is not made, then both parties will proceed to a trial. Because this is a civil suit, the decision will be made by a judge, being if both parties do not request for a jury trial. If the trial takes place within a district court, the process can take up to 6 months, however if the trial takes place within the Supreme Court, the process could take up to a year. The court will then rule as to who the said judgment is given to, in other words an official decision is finally made.
The Charters of Freedom: A New World is at Hand. The Constitution of the United States: A
Transcription. Retrieved on October 19, 2010 from //www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html