State of Confusion Paper

Running Head: STATE OF CONFUSION PAPER

State of Confusion Paper

Samantha Curry-Woods

Professor Winifred Cannon

University of Phoenix

BUS LAW 415

October 13, 2010

State of Confusion Paper

Trucks and trailers have hitches as part of their vehicles. The truckers who drive the vehicles have a responsibility to ensure that the hitches are safe and in quality condition on the state highway. The state of Confusion has enacted a statute that requires all trucks and towing trailers that travel within Confusion to use a B-type hitch. Any trucker who drives through the state of Confusion without a B-type hitch must stop and have one installed. If the trucker does not stop to have a B-type hitch installed then, the trucker has to drive around the state of Confusion. The federal government does not have a record of standardizing the B-type truck hitches for the highways. Tanya Tucker, a business owner and resident of the state of Denial, is not pleased with the added expense the statute is costing her business. Tanya filed a lawsuit against the state of Confusion with hope to overturn the new statute of Confusion. The following paragraphs will outline jurisdiction over Tanya’s lawsuit, determine if the statute is constitutional or not, explain the provisions of the U.S. Constitution that determine validity, and the stages of a civil suit.

Tanya Trucker versus the state of Confusion is the name of the case. Tanya is the plaintiff and the state of Confusion is the defendant. Both sides are private parties and the cases can be heard in civil court. Civil Courts hear cases for corporations, cases between two individuals, or between an individual and a corporation, in which the victim is awarded compensation. Tanya lives in the state of Denial and has filed a lawsuit against the state of Confusion. According to Cheeseman (2010), the federal court will have jurisdiction because “a case may be brought in federal court if there is diversity of citizenship” (p....