a newspaper columnist predicted that the coast of State X

profileSuperClass
 (Not rated)
 (Not rated)
Chat

On June 15, a newspaper columnist predicted that the coast of State X would be flooded on the following September 1. Relying on this pronouncement, Gullible quit his job and sold his property at a loss so as not to be financially ruined. When the flooding did not occur, Gullible sued the columnist in a State X court for damages. The court dismissed the case for failure to state a cause of action under applicable State law. On appeal, the State X Supreme Court upheld the lower court. Three months after this ruling, the State Y Supreme Court heard an appeal in which a lower court had ruled that a reader could sue a columnist for falsely predicting flooding.
(a) Must the State Y Supreme Court follow the ruling of the State X Supreme Court as a matter of stare decisis?
(b) Should the State Y lower court have followed the ruling of the State X Supreme Court until the State Y Supreme Court issued a ruling on the issue?
(c) Once the State X Supreme Court issued its ruling, could the U.S. Supreme Court overrule the State X Supreme Court?
(d) If the State Y Supreme Court and the State X Supreme Court rule in exactly opposite ways, must the U.S. Supreme Court resolve the conflict between the two courts?

    • 8 years ago
    a newspaper columnist predicted that the coast of State X A+ Tutorial use as Guide
    NOT RATED

    Purchase the answer to view it

    blurred-text
    • attachment
      case_analysis_a_newspaper_columnist_predicted_that_the_coast_of_state_x.docx