State of Confusion Paper

State of Confusion Paper

Dianne Vinoya Roy

University of Phoenix

State of Confusion

In the state of Confusion, there is a statute that requires trucks and towing trailers that uses its highways to use a specific type of truck hitch. This hitch is called a b-type hitch and is only manufactured by one company. That company is only found in the state of Confusion. This means that the trucker will have to stop at the state lines and is required to have the hitch installed before proceeding to drive through the state. If a trucker decides not to install this hitch, they are not allowed to drive their trunk in the state (University of Phoenix, 2009).

Tanya Trucker is a trucking company owner from the state of Denial. She is not happy with this statute that the state of Confusion, because of the additional expense she needs to pay when her trucks need to pass through the state. Tanya wants to overturn this statute and file suit against the state of Confusion (University of Phoenix, 2009). In this paper one will find who has jurisdiction to this appeal, if the state of Confusion’s statute is constitutional, and whether or not Tanya will be able to prevail in this suit.

Jurisdiction

In this case the state of Confusion’s appeals court has jurisdiction over Tanya’s suit because Tanya is trying to overturn a statute that was passed in the state of Confusion. According to Cheeseman, “State courts have jurisdictions to hear cases that federal courts do not have jurisdiction to hear. These usually involve state laws.” This means that the argument in hand is between her and the state of which the rule is passed, which in this case is the state of Confusion. Tanya’s argument can be...