Question

provide an earlier california appellate or supreme court case that each of these cases was based on. then list the counsel representing the parties, noting your favorite lawyer in the bunch. finally compare/contrast how the respective courts apply tort and/or contract principles in these cases.

Answer 1

The question pertains to the legal principles of precedent, the role of counsel in appellate cases, and how tort and contract principles are applied in court. It requires an understanding of the legal process from trial to Supreme Court review and how decisions like those of the Earl Warren Court have shaped American policy and law.

Step-by-step explanation:

The subject matter of the question revolves around understanding how precedent influences new cases, particularly in the context of tort and contract principles, as well as the role of counsel in these cases. When discussing earlier cases that new cases may be based on, we look at the principles established by appellate or Supreme Court decisions that create a framework for judges to apply in subsequent cases. These principles are known as stare decisis, which dictates that courts should follow historical cases when making a ruling on a similar issue unless there's a strong reason not to.

Identifying the counsel representing the parties would require researching the specifics of each case, which often involves detailing the attorneys from each side and selecting a 'favorite lawyer' based on professional merit or personal admiration. However, without specifics about the cases in question, it is impossible to list the counsel or pick a favorite lawyer.

When comparing how courts apply tort and/or contract principles, it involves examining the fact patterns and legal arguments presented, the courts' interpretation of applicable laws, and how they relate to rights and obligations established in precedent. The Earl Warren Court's decisions, such as Brown v. Board of Education and its impact on civil rights and liberties, showcase how judicial review can shape policy. The process of a case's journey through the legal system, from trial court to potential Supreme Court review through a writ of certiorari, is central to understanding how legal issues evolve and are resolved over time.

Answer 2

An explanation of how California appellate or supreme court cases can be based on earlier cases and the use of precedents in making decisions.

Step-by-step explanation:

In order to answer your question, it is necessary to have specific cases to refer to. Unfortunately, you have not provided any specific cases. However, I can provide you with a general explanation of how California appellate or supreme court cases can be based on earlier cases.

When a court case is appealed, it means the losing party is challenging the decision made by the lower court. The appellate court or supreme court will then review the case and make a decision based on the arguments presented by the parties involved and the relevant precedents.

Precedents are the principles or guidelines established by previous court decisions. When a court makes a decision, it often considers how similar cases have been decided in the past and follows the principle of stare decisis, which means relying on past decisions and their precedents when making new decisions.