EARN COLLEGE CREDIT FOR ONLY $35
A COURSE WITH LAWSHELF!

LawShelf courses have been evaluated and recommended for college credit by the National College Credit Recommendation Service (NCCRS), and may be transferred to over 1,500 colleges and universities.

We also have established a growing list of partner colleges that guarantee LawShelf credit transfers, including Excelsior College, Thomas Edison State University, University of Maryland Global Campus, Purdue University Global, and Touro University Worldwide.

For a limited time: Purchase a course multi-pack for yourself or a friend!
3-COURSE
MULTI-PACK -
$70
5-COURSE
MULTI-PACK -
$105

Question 1

The purpose of the summons is:

Question 2

The proper rule in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that governs the proper form and substance of a summons is:

Question 3

The purpose of the complaint is:

Question 4

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that the plaintiff present his complaint to the court:

Question 5

The major distinction between a supplemental complaint and an amended complaint is:

Question 6

The purpose of the answer is:

Question 7

Generally, the defendant must submit his answer to the court and the other parties in the lawsuit within:

Question 8

If the defendant elects to waive service, the defendant must submit his answer within:

Question 9

George was injured when a crane, operated by LiftIt, Inc., dropped a large crate on his foot. As a result, George sustained a broken foot and was forced to take a leave of absence from his job for six months. The substance of his complaint contained only the following: "On July 1, 2003, plaintiff George was injured when a crate fell upon his foot, breaking it in several places. Plaintiff George seeks $100,000 in monetary relief." The complaint does not specifically identify LiftIt, Inc., as the defendant. George's attorney submitted the complaint to the court and a copy to LiftIt, Inc. on July 31, 2003. Would the court find that the plaintiff's complaint is proper?

Question 10

On April 1, 2003, Rachel was in a car accident with Peter. Rachel was driving her Volkswagen Jetta down Park Avenue in New York City when she was struck by Peter's oncoming Corvette, which ran a red light. Rachel filed a complaint against Peter on June 3, 2003, alleging the following: 1. On April 1, 2003, Plaintiff Rachel was driving her 2001 Volkswagen Jetta car down Park Avenue in New York City at approximately 1:30 P.M. 2. At the corner of Park Avenue and 34th Street, Defendant Peter, driving a 2003 red Corvette, struck Plaintiff Rachel's car. Defendant Peter negligently ran the red light. 3. Plaintiff Rachel seeks damages in the amount of $90,000 for injury to her personal property and medical injuries and expenses. Plaintiff Rachel also seeks $20,000 in damages for emotional distress as a result of the accident. 4. Plaintiff seeks recovery based on New York State's Automobile Insurance Act and common law negligence. Defendant Peter discovers that his brakes failed and that the brake manufacturer was solely liable for the accident. What would be the best course of action for Defendant Peter to take?