1. MUSIC: SERGEI PROKOFIEV, PETER & THE WOLF (1936) PHILADELPHIA Orchestra (1977) conductOR: EUGENE ORMANDY NARRATOR: DAVID BOWIE

2. Liesner DQ16: Uranium What are “the superior advantages which the trial court had”? Visual Observation of Witnesses Hearing Testimony

3. Liesner DQ16: Uranium What do these advantages suggest about the appropriate role of the appellate court in reviewing factual determinations made by juries or trial judges?

4. Liesner DQ16: Uranium What do these advantages suggest about the appropriate role of the appellate court in reviewing factual determinations made by juries or trial judges? DEFERENCE!!

5. Liesner Brief: Uranium RATIONALES Not a lot in a narrow case reviewing sufficiency of the evidence. Might give substantive rule as a doctrinal rationale. Might give “superior advantages” as a policy rationale

6. LOGISTICS: CLASS #7 Dean’s Fellow Make-up Fri 1:30-2:20 Room F109 Radium: Shaw Brief Due Thurs @9pm – Qs on Instructions? Other Qs on Instructions for Written Assignments/ Common Writing Concerns? Everyone Called On!!

7. Liesner DQ17-18: Radium 17. In its second paragraph, the court announces the “prevailing rule.” What does the court mean by “vested”? By “divested”? What types of evidence would you try to find in order to prove that this test was or was not met? What policies support the rule? What policies suggest that it has problems? 18. Suppose you had to use the “prevailing rule” to decide the outcome in Pierson? What arguments could you make for each side?

8. Liesner DQ17: Radium “Prevailing rule” (Three Formulations): Property in a wild animal created if people have “substantially permanently deprived [animal] of his liberty—had him so in their power that escape was highly improbable, if not impossible….” “The instant a wild animal is brought under the control of a person so that actual possession is practically inevitable, a vested property interest in it accrues which cannot be divested by another’s intervening and killing it.”

9. Liesner DQ17: Radium “The instant a wild animal is brought under the control of a person so that actual possession is practically inevitable, a vested property interest in it accrues which cannot be divested by another’s intervening and killing it.” Meaning of Vested?

10. Liesner DQ17: Radium “The instant a wild animal is brought under the control of a person so that actual possession is practically inevitable, a vested property interest in it accrues which cannot be divested by another’s intervening and killing it.” Meaning of Vested? Of Divested?

11. Liesner DQ17: Radium Example of Property Right We’ve Discussed That is Contingent (As Opposed to Vested)?

12. Liesner DQ17: Radium Example of Property Right We’ve Discussed That is Contingent (As Opposed to Vested)? RATIONE SOLI

13. Liesner DQ17: Radium “Prevailing rule” (Three Formulations): Property in a wild animal created if people have “substantially permanently deprived [animal] of his liberty—had him so in their power that escape was highly improbable, if not impossible….” “The instant a wild animal is brought under the control of a person so that actual possession is practically inevitable, a vested property interest in it accrues which cannot be divested by another’s intervening and killing it.”

14. Liesner DQ17: Radium “Prevailing rule” (Three Formulations): substantially permanently deprive [animal] of liberty (SPDL) [animal] so in their power that escape improbable, if not impossible [animal] under control so that actual possession practically inevitable

15. Liesner DQ17: Radium What policies support the rule? What policies suggest that it has problems? As compared to what?

16. Liesner DQ17: Radium COMPARE POSSIBLE RULES 1.Actual Possession Likely 2.Actual Possession Practically Inevitable 3.Actual Possession Inevitable Policies Supporting Choice of #2?

17. Liesner DQ17: Radium COMPARE POSSIBLE RULES 1.Actual Possession Likely 2.Actual Possession Practically Inevitable 3.Actual Possession Inevitable Policies Opposing Choice of #2?

18. Liesner DQ17: Radium “Prevailing rule” (Three Formulations): substantially permanently deprive [animal] of liberty (SPDL) [animal] so in their power that escape improbable, if not impossible [animal] under control so that actual possession practically inevitable MEANING OF LANGUAGE?

19. Liesner DQ17: Radium MEANING OF LANGUAGE? Court refers to “the prevailing rule;” so might believe all three mean the same thing. BUT usual assumption in law that all language is there for a reason, so different phrases must mean different things.

20. Liesner DQ17: Radium Property Rights in Animal IF: substantially permanently deprived [animal] of his liberty MEANING OF LANGUAGE? Significance of Two Separate Adverbs?

21. Liesner DQ17: Radium Property Rights in Animal IF: so in their power that escape was highly improbable, if not impossible under the control of a person so that actual possession is practically inevitable MEANING OF LANGUAGE? Difference betw. underlined phrases?

22. Liesner DQ17: Radium Property Rights in Animal IF: so in their power that escape was highly improbable, if not impossible under the control of a person so that actual possession is practically inevitable MEANING OF LANGUAGE? Difference betw. underlined phrases?

23. Liesner DQ17: Radium Property Rights in Animal IF: 1.so in their power that escape was highly improbable, if not impossible 2.under the control of a person so that actual possession is practically inevitable Nice idea (from Hito B2): Maybe… #1 is test designed to use for animal in net or trap; #2 is test designed to use for animal being chased/mortally wounded

24. Liesner DQ18: Radium Apply to Pierson Facts: Property Rights if … substantially permanently deprived [animal] of [its] liberty

25. Liesner DQ18: Radium Apply to Pierson Facts: Property Rights if … under the control of a person so that actual possession is practically inevitable

26. Liesner DQ18: Radium Apply to Pierson Facts: Property Rights if … so in their power that escape was highly improbable, if not impossible We’ll leave for you

27. Liesner DQ18: Radium Applying Legal Rule /Test 1.Look for best arguments for each party – Be Cognizant of Structure of Test – Use Care w Language – Utilize Definitions

28. Liesner DQ18: Radium Applying Legal Rule /Test 1.Look for best arguments for each party 2.If significant doctrinal arguments for both parties, try to resolve with: – Comparisons to facts of cases – Other language from cases – Policy Arguments (incl. Purpose of Rule)

29. Liesner Trial Transcript: DQ19 Oxygen (B2) Attorneys for Liesners Nanes, Tammy Deleon, Blair Lasoff, Sean Attorneys for Wanie Baros, Cara Holmes, Jordan Vaal, Joshua

30. Liesner Trial Transcript: DQ19 Oxygen Note Anderson testimony (p.17): “REPLEVIED” Suggests replevin was cause of action

31. Liesner Trial Transcript: DQ19 Oxygen Liesners must have argued: L-Boys did mortally wound wolf L-Boys did continue pursuit BEST EVIDENCE SUPPORTING?

32. Liesner Trial Transcript: DQ19 Oxygen KEY ARGUMENTS BY WANIE’S ATTORNEYS? Uncertain that L-Boys mortally wounded wolf L-Boys did not continue pursuit BEST EVIDENCE SUPPORTING?