Lesson 11 of 10

In Progress

5.4: Discussing cases & comparing questions

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ theme_builder_area=”post_content” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_column _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” type=”4_4″ theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” theme_builder_area=”post_content” link_option_url_new_window=”on” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″]

Goals

To gain a deeper understanding of the questions asked in the Lefkowitz video discussion by comparing them with the questions in the reading on “Discussing Cases” (see below.)
To practice categorizing complex ideas in connection with US-style law study and legal practice.

Instructions

Skim the reading titled “Discussing Cases” (pp. 227-232).
Read and answer the questions below, which are based on information taken from “Discussing Cases.”

Question 1

Review the chart below.
For each question from column A, pick a question from column B that you think is saying something similar or is a similar type of question.
Also, think about–or write down–your reason or explanation for why you think it is a good match (or better than some of the other options.)

A	B
Questions from the *Lefkowitz* lecture video:	Sample questions from the “Discussing Cases” reading:
A. Is this an offer that Lefkowitz can accept?	1. What are the facts of this case?
B. How do we know?	2. What is the issue on appeal?
C. Does this “worth to $100” mean anything to you? I mean, does “to” change anything?	3. What did the court hold?
D. Why do you disagree with the court?	4. What do you think of the plaintiff’s argument that….?
E. Will Lefkowitz recover for this?	5. Do you agree with the defendant that….?
F. Now, how can this be? How can an advertisement be an offer when that is so counter to what we said before?	6. Are you convinced by the defendant’s claim that…..?
G. So first come, first served. We’re telling you in advance everything you need to do to accept it. And only one person is going to be able to accept it, at least for each of the products. This said first come, first served. Why wasn’t– what’s the difference?	7. What does the court mean when it says….?
H. Now, Joey, does the store have the right to withdraw the offer?	8. Did the court state a broad or narrow holding?
I. So when does Lefkowitz accept? Suppose I’m Lefkowitz and you see me walking towards you at the store, and I’m waving the newspaper, and I’ve got my dollar. Have I accepted yet?	9. Was this the right decision?
J. Would I have a contractual right if you did that?	10. Why do you think the court applied this rule….?
K. Could we argue–the court kind of glosses over this, but the first time when they told him that it was only an offer for women and that these offers were intended for women, in general– could that be a revocation of the offer from Lefkowitz specifically?Any ideas on what you might try to do if you’re revoking the offer?	11. Do you agree with the court’s analysis that this case is similar to….?
L. Joey, how do we think about that? Lefkowitz knew that the initial offer was only made for women. Shouldn’t that preclude him from accepting the second ad even if it was an offer?	12. What was the underlying policy rationale for the decision? Are you convinced by this rationale?
M. Now, here’s an interesting question– could they have said that in the advertisement? This is directed for women only. Men, you’re not able to accept it.	13. Imagine that Lewis was actually injured by the elevator. What result would follow?
N. Can you make offers that are only available to one gender?	14. Suppose that instead of ‘merely stalling,’ the elevator jumped erratically between floors. Would this change the court’s analysis?
	15. How is this case similar to….?
	16. Is this case distinguishable from….?
	17. How do you reconcile this case with…..?
	18. What are the consequences of this case for……?
	19. Does this case create a slippery slope…..?
	20. Will this case open the floodgates for more litigation on…..?

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_db_show_hide_button button_text=”Show Me the Instructors’ Answer” button_alignment=”center” db_hide_on_load=”#Fact1″ db_show_on_click=”#Fact1″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][/et_pb_db_show_hide_button][et_pb_text module_id=”Fact1″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” hover_enabled=”0″ global_colors_info=”{}” theme_builder_area=”post_content” sticky_enabled=”0″]

Note: These are suggested matches from the instructor. However, other matches might also make sense. Most of them are not perfect matches. Like with US-style legal arguments, your reasons for your decision are more important than the answer itself.

A. Is this an offer that Lefkowitz can accept?

2. What is the issue on appeal?

B. How do we know?

1. What are the facts of this case?

C. Does this “worth to $100” mean anything to you? I mean, does “to” change anything?

2. What is the issue on appeal?

D. Why do you disagree with the court?

4. What do you think of the plaintiff’s argument that….?

E. Will Lefkowitz recover for this?

3. What did the court hold?

F. Now, how can this be? How can an advertisement be an offer when that is so counter to what we said before?

6. Are you convinced by the defendant’s claim that…..?

G. So first come, first served. We’re telling you in advance everything you need to do to accept it. And only one person is going to be able to accept it, at least for each of the products. This said first come, first served. Why wasn’t– what’s the difference?

6. Are you convinced by the defendant’s claim that…..?

H. Now, Joey, does the store have the right to withdraw the offer?

6. Are you convinced by the defendant’s claim that…..?

I. So when does Lefkowitz accept? Suppose I’m Lefkowitz and you see me walking towards you at the store, and I’m waving the newspaper, and I’ve got my dollar. Have I accepted yet?

14. Suppose that instead of ‘merely stalling,’ the elevator jumped erratically between floors. Would this change the court’s analysis?

J. Would I have a contractual right if you did that?

13. Imagine that Lewis was actually injured by the elevator. What result would follow?

K. Could we argue–the court kind of glosses over this, but the first time when they told him that it was only an offer for women and that these offers were intended for women, in general– could that be a revocation of the offer from Lefkowitz specifically?Any ideas on what you might try to do if you’re revoking the offer?

9. Was this the right decision?

L. Joey, how do we think about that? Lefkowitz knew that the initial offer was only made for women. Shouldn’t that preclude him from accepting the second ad even if it was an offer?

10. Why do you think the court applied this rule….? OR
5. Do you agree with the defendant that….?

M. Now, here’s an interesting question– could they have said that in the advertisement? This is directed for women only. Men, you’re not able to accept it.

13. Imagine that Lewis was actually injured by the elevator. What result would follow?

N. Can you make offers that are only available to one gender?

14. Suppose that instead of ‘merely stalling,’ the elevator jumped erratically between floors. Would this change the court’s analysis?

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_db_show_hide_button button_text=”Hide the answer Please” button_alignment=”center” db_hide_on_click=”#Fact1″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][/et_pb_db_show_hide_button][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ theme_builder_area=”post_content” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_column _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” type=”4_4″ theme_builder_area=”post_content”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” theme_builder_area=”post_content” hover_enabled=”0″ sticky_enabled=”0″]

Question 2

For each question from column A, pick the question category from column B that you think is the best match.
Think about–or write down your reasons–why you think it is a good match (or better than other possible options.)

Categories:

A	B
Questions from the *Lefkowitz* lecture video:	Categories for questions from the “Discussing Cases” reading:
A. Is this an offer that Lefkowitz can accept?	1. Critiquing the Parties’ Claims
B. How do we know?	2. Commenting on the Court’s Holding
C. Does this “worth to $100” mean anything to you? I mean, does “to” change anything?	3. Evaluating the Reasons Advanced by the Court
D. Why do you disagree with the court?	4. Applying the Holding or Reasoning of a Case to a Hypothetical
E. Will Lefkowitz recover for this?	5. Comparing the Case to Other Cases You Have Read
F. Now, how can this be? How can an advertisement be an offer when that is so counter to what we said before?	6. Speculating About the Implications of a Case
G. So first come, first served. We’re telling you in advance everything you need to do to accept it. And only one person is going to be able to accept it, at least for each of the products. This said first come, first served. Why wasn’t– what’s the difference?	7. None of the above
H. Now, Joey, does the store have the right to withdraw the offer?
I. So when does Lefkowitz accept? Suppose I’m Lefkowitz and you see me walking towards you at the store, and I’m waving the newspaper, and I’ve got my dollar. Have I accepted yet?
J. Would I have a contractual right if you did that?
K. Could we argue–the court kind of glosses over this, but the first time when they told him that it was only an offer for women and that these offers were intended for women, in general– could that be a revocation of the offer from Lefkowitz specifically?Any ideas on what you might try to do if you’re revoking the offer?
L. Joey, how do we think about that? Lefkowitz knew that the initial offer was only made for women. Shouldn’t that preclude him from accepting the second ad even if it was an offer?
M. Now, here’s an interesting question– could they have said that in the advertisement? This is directed for women only. Men, you’re not able to accept it.
N. Can you make offers that are only available to one gender?

Note: These are the instructor’s suggested categorizations, but these are not perfect matches. If you put the questions in different categories, that’s ok too. The important part is that you have a reason for your decision, whatever the reason is.

Critiquing the Parties’ Claims

H. Now, Joey, does the store have the right to withdraw the offer?

Commenting on the Court’s Holding

A. Is this an offer that Lefkowitz can accept?
B. How do we know?
C. Does this “worth to $100” mean anything to you? I mean, does “to” change anything?
D. Why do you disagree with the court?
E. Will Lefkowitz recover for this?

Evaluating the Reasons Advanced by the Court

F. Now, how can this be? How can an advertisement be an offer when that is so counter to what we said before?
G. So first come, first served. We’re telling you in advance everything you need to do to accept it. And only one person is going to be able to accept it, at least for each of the products. This said first come, first served. Why wasn’t– what’s the difference?
I. So when does Lefkowitz accept? Suppose I’m Lefkowitz and you see me walking towards you at the store, and I’m waving the newspaper, and I’ve got my dollar. Have I accepted yet?
L. Joey, how do we think about that? Lefkowitz knew that the initial offer was only made for women. Shouldn’t that preclude him from accepting the second ad even if it was an offer?

Applying the Holding or Reasoning of a Case to a Hypothetical

J. Would I have a contractual right if you did that?
K. Could we argue–the court kind of glosses over this, but the first time when they told him that it was only an offer for women and that these offers were intended for women, in general– could that be a revocation of the offer from Lefkowitz specifically? Any ideas on what you might try to do if you’re revoking the offer?
M. Now, here’s an interesting question– could they have said that in the advertisement? This is directed for women only. Men, you’re not able to accept it.
N. Can you make offers that are only available to one gender?

Comparing the Case to Other Cases You Have Read

[Note: If you watch the whole Lefkowitz lecture video, the professor discusses other cases and compares them to Lefkowitz.]

Speculating About the Implications of a Case

[Note: If you watch the whole Lefkowitz lecture video, the professor asks questions that fall into this category.]

None of the above

[If you think there is a question that doesn’t fit into any of these categories, then what new category would you create for this type of question?]

A	B
Questions from the *Lefkowitz* lecture video:	Sample questions from the "Discussing Cases" reading:
A. Is this an offer that Lefkowitz can accept?	1. What are the facts of this case?
B. How do we know?	2. What is the issue on appeal?
C. Does this "worth to $100" mean anything to you? I mean, does "to" change anything?	3. What did the court hold?
D. Why do you disagree with the court?	4. What do you think of the plaintiff's argument that....?
E. Will Lefkowitz recover for this?	5. Do you agree with the defendant that....?
F. Now, how can this be? How can an advertisement be an offer when that is so counter to what we said before?	6. Are you convinced by the defendant's claim that.....?
G. So first come, first served. We're telling you in advance everything you need to do to accept it. And only one person is going to be able to accept it, at least for each of the products. This said first come, first served. Why wasn't-- what's the difference?	7. What does the court mean when it says....?
H. Now, Joey, does the store have the right to withdraw the offer?	8. Did the court state a broad or narrow holding?
I. So when does Lefkowitz accept? Suppose I'm Lefkowitz and you see me walking towards you at the store, and I'm waving the newspaper, and I've got my dollar. Have I accepted yet?	9. Was this the right decision?
J. Would I have a contractual right if you did that?	10. Why do you think the court applied this rule....?
K. Could we argue--the court kind of glosses over this, but the first time when they told him that it was only an offer for women and that these offers were intended for women, in general-- could that be a revocation of the offer from Lefkowitz specifically?Any ideas on what you might try to do if you're revoking the offer?	11. Do you agree with the court's analysis that this case is similar to....?
L. Joey, how do we think about that? Lefkowitz knew that the initial offer was only made for women. Shouldn't that preclude him from accepting the second ad even if it was an offer?	12. What was the underlying policy rationale for the decision? Are you convinced by this rationale?
M. Now, here's an interesting question-- could they have said that in the advertisement? This is directed for women only. Men, you're not able to accept it.	13. Imagine that Lewis was actually injured by the elevator. What result would follow?
N. Can you make offers that are only available to one gender?	14. Suppose that instead of 'merely stalling,' the elevator jumped erratically between floors. Would this change the court's analysis?
	15. How is this case similar to....?
	16. Is this case distinguishable from....?
	17. How do you reconcile this case with.....?
	18. What are the consequences of this case for......?
	19. Does this case create a slippery slope.....?
	20. Will this case open the floodgates for more litigation on.....?

Reading US Cases 1: What is a Case?