2004

State v. Miller (February 2004, MPT-1) In this item, applicants are employed by the State’s Attorney and are assisting in the prosecution of the defendant, Tom Miller, on two counts of aggravated assault involving domestic violence. Pursuant to the Franklin Evidence Code, the prosecution has given notice that it intends to introduce evidence of three prior acts of violence committed by the defendant against Jan Adams and her daughter, Sara. Ms. Adams, Sara, and the defendant used to live together. Defense counsel has objected to the introduction of this “other acts” evidence and the court has ordered both sides to submit briefs on the issues raised in defense counsel’s objection. The File consists of the instructional memo from the supervising State’s Attorney, which sets forth the three grounds of defense counsel’s objection, an office memo prescribing the format and contents of briefs, and a transcript of a police interview with Jan Adams. The Library contains various sections of the Franklin Evidence Code and the Franklin Penal Code, as well as two appellate cases.

In re Riviera (February 2004, MPT-2) Applicants’ law firm represents Cara Rivera in a personal injury action against the owners of an amusement park where Rivera was injured on a ride. The matter to about to go to trial and the supervising partner has learned that opposing counsel refuses to stipulate to the authenticity of several items of evidence he intends to introduce in Rivera’s case in chief. Applicants are asked to write a memorandum to the supervising partner spelling out exactly what has to be done to compel production of the documents and exhibits in court for use at trial and to lay the foundation for (i.e., authenticate) for introducing them into evidence. The partner’s memo prescribes the format applicants are expected to use. They are also told that all the evidence is relevant and admissible if properly authenticated. The File contains the partner’s instructing memo, a list of the evidentiary items in question, and a letter/report from an investigator. The Library contains an excerpt from the treatise Walker on Evidence in the Franklin Courts and sections of the Franklin Rules of Evidence and Code of Civil Procedure.

Bennett v. Sands Construction Company (February 2004, MPT 3) In this performance test item, applicants represent Samuel Bennett, who has just spent $45,000 to replace the roof on his house and repair damage resulting from leaks in the original roof. Bennett wants to sue Sands Construction Company, the contractor that built his house and installed the original roof seven years ago. The problem is that the applicable four-and six-year statutes of limitation appear to have run. Applicants are asked to write a memorandum analyzing whether there is any way around the apparent bar of the tort and contact statutes of limitation. The File contains notes of an interview with Bennett and a series of letters chronicling the events. The Library contains the applicable statutes and two cases interpreting them.

In re Marian Bonner (July 2004, MPT-1) In this item, applicants’ law firm represents Dr. Nicole Hall, the daughter of deceased educator Dr. Marian Bonner. Dr. Bonner was a prominent, highly respected educational reformer in the Franklin public school system. Dr. Bonner bequeathed all her property to Dr. Hall. Upon her death, Dr. Bonner’s personal papers were unwittingly given to a for-profit corporation, SECA (Success for Every Child Association), which has been awarded state contracts for taking over under-performing public schools in Franklin. Dr. Hall has learned from the Franklin Library Association that SECA intends to use Dr. Bonner’s writings and name for SECA’s commercial advantage. Dr. Hall is concerned that SECA’s use of her mother’s name and papers for its cause will distort her mother’s proud legacy as a champion of public education. Dr. Hall, as the successor in interest to her mother’s copyright in her papers and her right of publicity, seeks the firm’s help in stopping SECA from using her mother’s writings and name. Applicants’ task is to draft a letter to SECA’s attorney demanding that SECA refrain from using Dr. Bonner’s name and her papers. The File contains the instructing memo from the supervising partner, a transcript of an interview with Dr. Hall, the letter from the Franklin Library Association, and a biographical sketch of Dr. Bonner. The Library contains excerpts from federal copyright statutes and two cases.

Graham Realty, Inc. v. Brenda Chapin (July 2004, MPT-2) For this item, applicants work in the Franklin Legal Aid Society representing Brenda Chapin, a tenant in an apartment building owned by Graham Realty, Inc. (GRI). GRI has brought a summary eviction proceeding against Chapin for failing to pay her rent. Chapin has been withholding her rent for seven months because GRI has refused to repair numerous defects in her apartment, notwithstanding her repeated requests. To successfully defend against GRI’s eviction action, Chapin will have to prove that GRI breached the implied warranty of habitability. Applicants’ task is to draft a case planning memo that identifies and evaluates Chapin’s claims, counterclaims, defenses, and/or remedies in the eviction action. The File consists of the Legal Aid Society’s intake officer's interview with Chapin, a letter from Chapin to GRI’s building manager detailing the defects in her apartment, the Legal Aid Society’s case planning memorandum guidelines and examples, a City of Avon Building Inspector Violation Report, and a newspaper article. The Library contains sections of the Franklin District Court Act and the Franklin Real Property Code, as well as two cases.

Wells v. Wells (July 2004, MPT-3) In this item, applicants are asked to draft a persuasive brief in support of Joan Wells’s petition to move her six-year old child, Sammy, to the state of Columbia, where Joan has been offered a job. Sammy’s father, Fred Wells, Joan’s former husband, opposes the move. Under the Franklin Dissolution of Marriage Act, Section 109, the court must hear the petition is required because when Joan Wells and Fred Wells were divorced in 2002, they were granted joint custody of Sammy. In this instance, joint custody is defined as joint legal custody and joint physical custody but does not imply equal durations of time with each parent. Joan has finished her doctoral studies, and she would like to relocate to Colombia to accept a position as an Associate Professor of Irish Literature and Studies at Columbia State University in Columbia City. This career opportunity is unparallel to any in Franklin. If permitted to move, Joan has made arrangements for Sammy’s care and upbringing and for various means of maintaining a relationship with his father. Fred opposes this move and believes that it is motivated by a desire to separate Sammy from him or by Joan’s jealousy related to his remarriage. The file contains a memorandum from Pamela Broyles (Joan’s attorney), a memorandum regarding persuasive briefs, and a transcript of a hearing. The library consists of two Franklin court cases and the Franklin Dissolution of Marriage Act.