Which of the following is a way to challenge or attack a legal position or argument based on a statute?
A. The elements of the statute are not met.
B. The key facts of the client's case and the facts required by the statute are not sufficiently similar.
C. The statute is not sufficiently broad to allow an interpretation other than the one being relied on.
D. The case being relied on to interpret the statute is on point.
E. All of the above
F. Answers a, b, and c above
G. Answers b and d above
Answer: A
You might also like to view...
Answer the following statements true (T) or false (F)
1. As a paralegal, you listen to a client’s story, apply your knowledge and judgement to that story and then give the client your opinion about what you think the client should do to protect his or her rights and obligations. This an example of UPL. 2. Paralegals, while they can’t explain a client’s legal rights to that client, they can interpret legal documents for the client. 3. Paralegals are allowed to give legal advice to family and friends as long as they are not clients of the law firm. 4. A paralegal may only draft a document for another person with direct supervision of the supervising attorney. 5. A paralegal may not be sanctioned by the bar.
A useful evidentiary principle which allows the judge to recognize easily provable facts is called _____________
Fill in the blank(s) with correct word
What is advocacy?
What will be an ideal response?
The rules section of a good case brief includes all of the law cited by the court
Indicate whether the statement is true or false