Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
14. May the dancer use State A's attachment law to secure the judgment?
State A law provides a method for attaching property at the start of a lawsuit to secure satisfaction of potential judgments. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 64(a) states: «every remedy is available that, under the law of the state where the court is located, provides for seizing a person or property to secure satisfaction of the potential judgment.»
A dancer sued her employer, a ballet company, in federal court in State A, claiming that the ballet company violated the dancer's rights under Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act. The ballet company is a small business, and the dancer is concerned that the ballet company might not have sufficient assets to pay the judgment.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
FRCP 64 allows for the seizing of one's property to satisfy a judgment and directs the federal court to use laws of the state in which it sits to make every remedy available to «secure satisfaction of the potential judgment,» which includes attachment.
B is correct. This is a federal question case, which means the FRCP apply. FRCP 64 incorporates state law, providing that every remedy is available that, under the law of the state where the federal court is located, allows for seizing property to secure satisfaction of a potential judgment. Thus, State A's attachment law applies under FRCP 64, even though this is a federal question case.
A is incorrect. This is the correct conclusion, but incorrect legal reasoning. The dancer may use State A's attachment law, but there is no requirement that she add a state law claim to the lawsuit.
C is incorrect. As stated above, the fact that this is a federal question case does not prevent the dancer from using State A's attachment law. The availability of state law remedies under FRCP 64 does not depend on the federal case being a diversity action.
D is incorrect. Again, there is no requirement of a state law claim here to be able to use State A's attachment law. Moreover, there is no federally-imposed limitation on the value of the garnishment to secure a judgment.