Essay On Courts Vs General Jurisdiction

    Limited jurisdiction courts only have jurisdiction in specific in only well-defined areas of law. General jurisdiction courts have general jurisdiction over all subject matters within their local jurisdiction.

The Courts of Special Jurisdiction or limited jurisdiction are limited to handling cases such as family matters, bankruptcy, patents, copyrights, probate, traffic, juvenile courts and small claims courts for cases under $5,000.00.(Understanding Federal and State Courts)

Case: In the late 1950's the New York State Board of Regents wrote and adopted a prayer, which was supposed to be nondenominational. The board recommended that students in public schools say the prayer on a voluntary basis every morning. In New Hyde Park Long Island a parent sued the school claiming that the prayer violated the first amendment of the constitution. The school argued that the prayer was nondenominational and did not attempt to "establish or endorse" a religion and thus that it did not violate the establishment clause.

The next step in the ladder is the District Court; like the Local Court, it has both Criminal and Civil Jurisdiction, however it hears most indictable offences in jury trials. The Supreme Courts Trial Division has original civil and criminal jurisdiction, but it only hears the most serious of criminal cases (like murder or terrorism). Additionally, its’ Court of Appeal hears direct appeals from the District Court and Supreme Court trial division – it usually only hears appeals regarding questions of law and not fact.

The Federal court system and the California court system has similar structures that can be viewed as a three-layer pyramid. For example, on the very top of the pyramid in regards to the federal court system there is the United States Supreme court. Secondly, in the middle of the pyramid there is the United States Court of Appeals. Lastly, on the very bottom of the pyramid is the United States District Courts. On the other end, California’s highest court is known as the Supreme court. In the center of the pyramid for California is known as Court of Appeals. Lastly, at the very bottom of the courts for California is known as the Superior Court. In contrast, the difference is the very bottom of the pyramid where the Federal court

The state trial courts of general jurisdiction are the district courts. The district court has exclusive jurisdiction on felony cases, as well as divorce cases, cases involving title to land, and election contest cases. It shares jurisdiction with the county courts, and in some case justice of the peace courts, for civil cases the lowest limit for hearing a case is a mere $200 in controversy, while in Justice of the Peace courts can hear cases up to $5,000. In a "catchall" provision it hears all cases in which jurisdiction is not placed in another trial court.

Reasoning: Determining jurisdiction is critical because jurisdiction not only allows the party to know whether that court is entitled to adjudicate a dispute, but it can also help determine which laws are applicable, which can make a difference in a party's recovery. For example, Georgia and Delaware might have different laws regarding damages so that Elle may have an advantage in one court as compared to another court. In order for a court to be able to exercise jurisdiction, the court must have some connection to either the parties or to the event in question. Therefore, the possibilities for jurisdiction include: the district court for the state of Georgia, the district court for the state of Delaware, or one of the state courts for either Georgia or Delaware. In order for federal jurisdiction to apply, the circumstances of the case must meet the requirements for diversity jurisdiction. Diversity jurisdiction refers to that federal court jurisdiction involved when the parties involved are from two

The Federal Court System is one of the most essential and significant functions to help settle a matter. Much work is involved in the application of a body of rules and principals of rulings. The path the Federal Courts have to take in order to be heard by the Supreme Court is a lengthy process. Given millions of disputes every year, it becomes impossible for the Federal Courts to be heard by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has jurisdictions that limit the variety of cases that are clearly defined in the Constitution. The Supreme Court has developed specific rules that within the jurisdictions will and will not hear. The Federal Court must show they have extreme and substantial evidence in the outcome of the case. In mootness, the Federal

Municipal Courts were created by the State Legislature and incorporated in each of the states’ cities. Larger cities have multiple Municipal Courts, the number depending on the city’s population and needs. Such courts have original jurisdiction over the enforcement of city ordinances. Moreover, Municipal Courts have concurrent jurisdiction, along with Justice of Peace Courts, in Class C misdemeanor cases originating within city limits. Municipal Courts have no jurisdiction over most civil matters and other functions include issuing search and arrest warrants.

What is a writ of certiorari? A common law writ issued by a superior court to one of inferior jurisdiction demanding the record of a particular case. What is the primary role of the U.S. Court of Appeals? To hear and dispose of the vast majority of cases appealed from the district courts. What are U.S. District Courts? General trial courts of the united states federal court system that hears both civil and criminal cases. When would a Federal District Court have jurisdiction in a case? If a case involved crimes against the united states, suits under national laws involving use of the mails, patent, copyright, trademark and other such technical matters and civil rights laws.

Many years ago, before courts existed matters was handled in a privately or informally. This often led to violence and unjust treatment of innocent people. During the rise of the Greek City States and the Roman Empire law enforcement became a public affair instead of private. (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worral, 2011). Along with this movement became formalized courts and other criminal justice institutions. This allowed for law enforcement matters to be handled in a more civilized manner for resolving human conflict.

One of the many differences between the federal and state courts is regarding each court’s jurisdiction (the types of cases that a court is authorized to hear). California state courts have a much broader jurisdiction than federal courts. Most hearings (felonies, family law, civil cases, probate, etc.) fall under state law and thus are within the jurisdiction of the California judicial system. (Turner et al., 2016). The cases that California courts are not allowed to hear are anything regarding United States federal law, any violations of the US Constitution, cases involving different states, bankruptcy, copyright, etc. Federal courts are limited to these types of cases as well as anything explicitly spelled out by the US Constitution or by Congress.

In the case of Margolin v. Novelty Now the appropriate court for this lawsuit depends upon several factors. In personal jurisdiction the book states that the courts are given the power to provide a decision in affecting the rights of individuals (Kubasek). In this case, the court will give a decision giving rights to Mr. Margolin, and taking rights from Novelty Now. For subject matter jurisdiction, a certain specified court will be able to hear the case This means, that it must be decided which court hears the case, whether state or federal jurisdiction. Since this case contains three different states, the federal court system must be the one to hear the case. In this case, minimum contacts must be determined to decide if a certain state will have power to assert personal jurisdiction over a defendant from another state (Kubasek). In this case, it must be decided if New York will take personal jurisdiction of the defendants residing in California, or Novelty Now residing in Florida.

<br>Towards the mid section of the Australian Court Hierarchy System, lies the County of District Court. The cases that this court's jurisdiction covers is very similar to those of the Supreme Court. This particular court hear appeals from the lower courts and a great majority of criminal hearings are heard in these courts. The judges appointed to hear the cases of this court are appointed by the State Parliament. The Country Court's jurisdiction is empowered to hear civil disputes in which one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) or less is claimed for personal damages.

There are three women on the Supreme Court, one of whom is Latina, and there is one black justice serving on the Supreme Court (Brown, 2016). This is a major issue. The United States, the “melting pot”, has an extreme lack of diversity in their court system. This is an issue that affects several aspects of society. Decisions made by judges will affect the lives of men, women, and their families. The decisions made by judges can also create law. Unlike political officials, the people do not always have the power to vote judges into their positions. Instead, the people hope that their peers with the power to affect the system choose a candidate that will fight for them. Often times, this does not happen.