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.
5. Which of the following statements is most clearly correct with respect to possible judicial notice of the fact that Capitan is the state's capital?
In contract litigation between the plaintiff and the defendant, a fact of consequence to the determination of the action is whether the plaintiff provided the defendant with a required notice at the defendant's branch office «in the state capital.» The plaintiff introduced evidence that he gave notice at the defendant's office in the city of Capitan. Although Capitan is the state's capital, the plaintiff failed to offer proof of that fact.
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
B is incorrect. A court can take judicial notice of a fact that is not subject to reasonable dispute, and the plaintiff would not have to provide any information to the court before it can take judicial notice.
C is incorrect. There is no burden shifting in cases involving judicial notice.
D is incorrect. In civil cases, the court shall instruct the jury to accept as conclusive any fact judicially noticed. The jury is required to accept a judicially noticed fact as conclusive on the issue. Because the identity of the capital of a state is a fact not subject to reasonable dispute, the judge can take judicial notice of it, even if neither party requests it.