I know this would make more sense in the current students side of the board, but since all the smart people seem to have stayed on this side, I'm throwing it here.So let's have 'em... stuff that's been bothering you in class, but your prof is unable/unwilling to explain it properly.... here's mine: what's the difference between a motion for summary judgment (R. 56) and a motion for judgment as a matter of law (R. 50a)? Is the only difference the stage in the trial when you can file them?PS--also, which 1L cases would make the best Halloween costume? We're having a dress-up party next week
Is that like beating a dead horse?
Quote from: Thou on October 22, 2006, 12:48:44 AMIs that like beating a dead horse?No. It's shorthand for what used to be known as legally impossible, as opposed to factually impossible. Having sex with someone you think is under the age of consent, but is not, is like shooting a stuffed deer. This is attempted statutory rape. Going to Madame Tussaud's and picking the pocket of a wax statue (legally impossible as it is no crime to rob a statue) is no different than picking the pocket of someone without a wallet (factually impossible, as they have nothing to rob). Both are attempted robbery. There used to be a defense of legal impossiblility, but it has since been abandoned for reasons which I find suspect. Thus, it's illegal to meet online and arrange to have sex with a police officer who you think is 12 years old. This would have been legally impossible, as no crime would have been committed had you actually slept with the police officer. The MPC abandoned impossiblity as a defense as it relied on external circumstances and not mens rea. I'm not sure this was a good thing.
I think, but I am not sure, that a few jurisdictions retain the legal impossibility defense. Louisiana comes to mind. You know, a great state for divining criminal defense resources in the law. Okay, I'm a little drunk and have no business in this thread.