The development of new discovery rules allows each attorney in the case to access all the evidences that the opposite side proposes to present, except the work product of the opposing attorney. To Explain: The reason for not making opposite attorney’s work product available.

Question

Casey is on trial under criminal allegations that she engaged in fraudulent behavior at the company she manages. She is worried when the plaintiff alleges that it has "unambiguous proof" that Casey is guilty. Which of the following is most likely true? If the plaintiff provides proof only up to the level of "clear and convincing," Casey can still be acquitted. Casey need not worry about the plaintiff's evidence, since parties tend to boast about the level of proof they can establish anyway. If the plaintiff meets a "clear and convincing" burden of proof, Casey will be found guilty. The plaintiff will most likely prove Casey is guilty, since criminal charges only need to meet a prima facie burden of proof.

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 3, Problem 1BS

Summary Introduction

Case Summary: The development of new discovery rules allows each attorney in the case to access all the evidences that the opposite side proposes to present, except the work product of the opposing attorney.

To Explain: The reason for not making opposite attorney’s work product available.

Expert Solution & Answer

Trending nowThis is a popular solution!

See solution

Check out sample textbook solution

Students have asked these similar questions

Casey is on trial under criminal allegations that she engaged in fraudulent behavior at the company she manages. She is worried when the plaintiff alleges that it has "unambiguous proof" that Casey is guilty. Which of the following is most likely true? If the plaintiff provides proof only up to the level of "clear and convincing," Casey can still be acquitted. Casey need not worry about the plaintiff's evidence, since parties tend to boast about the level of proof they can establish anyway. If the plaintiff meets a "clear and convincing" burden of proof, Casey will be found guilty. The plaintiff will most likely prove Casey is guilty, since criminal charges only need to meet a prima facie burden of proof.

You are served with Plaintiff's complaint. Plaintiff is suing you! You are furious. Should you ignore Plaintiff's complaint and hope it goes away? Why or why not? What could possibly go wrong? If you do respond to Plaintiff's complaint, should you just deny all of Plaintiff's allegations so Plaintiff will go away, or include something else?

Q1. To prevail in an action brought under common law, the plaintiff must show all of the following except: (in your response, explain the burdens of proof for a third-party plaintiff under common law). Q2. Kerry CPA is the auditor for Sammy Corp. During the audit, Kerry discovers a material misstatement in Sammy's financial statements. Sammy's management tells Kerry that if the misstatement is corrected or if Kerry issues an opinion that indicates there is a material misstatement, Sammy Corp. will likely have to declare bankruptcy and thousands of employees will lose their jobs. Which of the following statements is true if the misstatement is not corrected and Kerry issues an unqualified opinion on Sammy's financial statements? (in your response, identify the court case that makes Kerry liable to any person who suffered a loss as a result of the fraud).