Chemistry periodic table of elements style design 2 powerpoint presentation slides.
ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.
-
Upload
edith-heath -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.
![Page 1: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES
Class #6Monday, August 31, 2015
![Page 2: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
MUSIC: Beethoven (Last Day of Ludwig)(Last Day of Ludwig)Symphonies #4 (1807) & #7 (1813)Recordings: Chamber Orchestra of EuropeNikolaus Harmoncourt, Conductor (1991)
Lunch & Office Hours Cancelled Today
![Page 3: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie:DQs to Help You Understand Case (URANIUM)
![Page 4: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.12(a) (URANIUM)
Liesner and another, by next friend, Respondents, v. Wanie, Appellant
What does “next friend” mean?
![Page 5: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.12(a) (URANIUM)
Next Friend
Legal representative for party who cannot adequately represent own interests.
Such as…?
![Page 6: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.12(a) (URANIUM)
Next Friend
Legal representative for party who cannot adequately represent own interests.
•Minors•Mentally Incompetent•Married Women (at Common Law)
![Page 7: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.12(a) (URANIUM)
Next Friend
Legal representative for party who cannot adequately represent own interests
To whom might ‘next friend’ refer in Liesner itself?
![Page 8: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.12(b) (URANIUM)
Prevailing Rule (2d Paragraph): “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?
![Page 9: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.12(b) (URANIUM)
Prevailing Rule: “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?
![Page 10: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.12(b) (URANIUM)
Example of Kind of Property Right We’ve Discussed That is Contingent
(As Opposed to Vested)?
![Page 11: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie DQ1.12(b)
Example of Kind of Property Right We’ve Discussed That is Contingent
(As Opposed to Vested)?
RATIONE SOLI
![Page 12: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.13 (URANIUM)
Second paragraph of opinion begins:
“It is conceded that …”
What was conceded here?
![Page 13: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.13 (URANIUM)
“It is conceded that if the plaintiffs had substantially permanently deprived the wolf of his liberty—had him so in their power that escape was highly improbable, if not impossible, before defendant appeared on the scene and with his gun pointed so as to reach within some three feet of the animal delivered a finishing shot, it had become the property of plaintiffs….”
![Page 14: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.13
“It is conceded that if the plaintiffs had substantially permanently deprived the wolf of his liberty—had him so in their power that escape was highly improbable, if not impossible, before defendant appeared on the scene and with his gun pointed so as to reach within some three feet of the animal
delivered a finishing shot, [then] it had become the property of plaintiffs….”
![Page 15: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Common Form Common Form of Legal Ruleof Legal Rule
IF [particular facts occur],
THEN [legal outcome follows].
![Page 16: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.13 (URANIUM)
Second paragraph of opinion begins:
“It is conceded that …”
Who conceded it?
![Page 17: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie DQ1.14
DIRECTED VERDICTTrial Court Rules That One Party Presented Insufficient Evidence to the Jury to Meet the Relevant Legal Standard.
![Page 18: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie DQ1.14:Liesner is Unusual Case:
Directed Verdict for Plaintiff (who has burden of proof in civil case).Language of opinion suggests that Trial Record contains factual disputes.Trial Court must have believed that undisputed evidence proved P’s case (i.e., D presented insufficient evidence to contradict undisputed evidence supporting P)
![Page 19: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.14 (URANIUM)
DIRECTED VERDICT•Trial Court Rules That Insufficient Evidence to Meet Relevant Legal Standard Was Presented to the Jury
•Two Possible Grounds for Appeal– Trial Court Applied Wrong Legal Standard– Evidence Was Sufficient to Meet Legal Standard
Which was Wanie’s claim here?
![Page 20: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.14 (URANIUM)
Wanie conceded the relevant legal rule, so must be challenging
assessment of evidence.
What exactly is still contested?
![Page 21: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.14
What exactly is still contested? “In the light of other evidence, all reasonable doubts may well have been removed as to who delivered the shot which so crippled the animal as to cause him to cease trying to escape, thus permitting appellant to substantially reach it with the muzzle of his gun at the instant of delivery of the finishing shot.”
![Page 22: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.14
What exactly is still contested? “In the light of other evidence, all reasonable doubts may well have been removed as to who delivered the shot which so crippled the animal as to cause him to cease trying to escape, thus permitting appellant to substantially reach it with the muzzle of his gun at the instant of delivery of the finishing shot.”
![Page 23: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Liesner v. Wanie: DQ1.14
Questions re What Appellant Disputed on Appeal?
![Page 24: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.08 (Economic Benefits)Helpful to argue to court that particular rule
would tangibly/materially improve society.
• E.g., Dissent says foxes harmful to society, so good to kill them:
“[O]ur decision should have in view the greatest possible encouragement to the destruction of an animal, so cunning and ruthless in his career.” (p.5)
![Page 25: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.08 (Economic Benefits)
Helpful to argue to court that particular rule would tangibly/materially improve society.
• E.g., Dissent says foxes harmful to society, so good to kill them.
• NOTE: Can strengthen this type of argument with, e.g., description or evidence re– Importance of poultry farming– Extent of harm caused by foxes
![Page 26: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.08 (Economic Benefits)
Helpful to argue to court that particular rule would tangibly/materially improve society.
• E.g., Dissent…– Says foxes harmful to society, so good to kill them. – Assumes its hot pursuit rule would result in more
foxes being killed.
Elaborate why Judge Livingston might believe this to be true.
![Page 27: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.08 (Economic Benefits)
Why does the dissent think its rule will result in more foxes being killed?
Unhappy Posts choose alternative activity.
Dissent: “[W]ho would keep a pack of hounds; or … would mount his steed, and for hours together ... pursue the windings of this wily quadruped, if just as night came on, and his stratagems and strength were nearly exhausted, a saucy intruder … were permitted to come in at the death, and bear away in triumph the object of pursuit?”
![Page 28: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.08 (Economic Benefits)
Why does the dissent think its rule will result in more foxes being killed? Unhappy Posts Choose Alternative Activity
Argument that Majority’s Rule will result in more foxes being killed?
![Page 29: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.08 (Economic Benefits)
• Why does the dissent think its rule will result in more foxes being killed? Unhappy Posts Choose Alternative Activity
• Argument that Majority’s Rule will result in more foxes being killed?
Determined Posts Work Harder at Killing • After all, they are as stubborn as a …• E.g., Whaling
![Page 30: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.08 (Economic Benefits)Common Problem:
If you are not going to get expected reward for labor, how do
you respond?
![Page 31: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.08 (Economic Benefits)
Common Problem: If you are not going to get expected reward for labor, how do you respond?
•Substitution Effect: Might choose differ-ent activity (in part or completely) that pays more or costs less.
![Page 32: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.08 (Economic Benefits)
Common Problem: If you are not going to get expected reward for labor, how do you respond?
•Substitution Effect: Might choose different activity that pays more or costs less.
-OR-
•Income Effect: Could increase labor--do more of activity; more effort; more investment--until you earn desired reward.
![Page 33: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.08 (Economic Benefits)
Common Problem: If you are not going to get expected reward for labor, how do you respond?
•Substitution Effect: Could choose different activity -OR- •Income Effect: Could increase labor
Often hard to predict which effect will predominate in any particular situation.
(Empirical Q)
![Page 34: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.08 (Economic Benefits)
The dissent assumes that we want to kill foxes as quickly as possible.
What Rule Would Be Appropriate if You Were Trying to Preserve Foxes Because They Were Commercially Valuable?
We’ll come back to in contexts of DQ1.10 & then Demsetz article in
two weeks.
![Page 35: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: (Intangible Interests)
Post unlikely to have cared much about monetary value of fox pelt; more likely angered by deliberate interference with activity of hunting.
DQ1.09(a): Is the “right” to hunt without interference a right society should protect
(where hunting is legal)?
![Page 36: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: (Intangible Interests)
DQ1.09(b): Post might believe Pierson killed fox spitefully for no reason except
to bother Post (ongoing family feud). Majority says we shouldn’t care.
![Page 37: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: (Intangible Interests)
Majority (last para.): “However uncourteous or unkind the conduct of Pierson towards Post … may have been, yet his act was productive of no injury or damage for which a legal remedy can be applied.”
Nice Version of “So What?”
![Page 38: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: (Intangible Interests)
Majority: “However uncourteous or unkind the conduct of Pierson towards Post … may have been, yet his act was productive of no injury or damage for which a legal remedy can be applied.”
DQ109(b): Is majority correct? Should a court take into account whether
Pierson had “bad intent” (as opposed to genuine attempt to hunt
fox for sport or pelt)?
![Page 39: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: (Intangible Interests)
If a court wants to take “bad intent” into account, what evidence could you use to prove Pierson’s intent here (not having access to Vulcan Mind Meld)?
![Page 40: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: (Intangible Interests)
PROOF OF INTENT•Required in Intentional Tort & Criminal Cases•Often Not Legally Relevant in Property Ownership Cases
![Page 41: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.09 (Intangible Interests)
PROOF OF INTENT•Required in Intentional Tort & Criminal Cases•Often Not Relevant to Property Ownership •Proof of Intent Often Expensive/Complex
– Ignoring Intent = Cheaper, More Certain Results – Determining Intent = More Fact-Specific
“Justice”
![Page 42: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.09 (Intangible Interests)
Can Use Unmade/Rejected Policy Arguments :•To support similar rejection in future cases: “The Pierson Majority treated bad intent as irrelevant, therefore….”
![Page 43: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQ1.09 (Intangible Interests)
Can Use Unmade/Rejected Policy Arguments :•To support similar rejection in future cases: “The Pierson Majority treated bad intent as irrelevant, therefore….”•To distinguish future cases: “The Pierson majority did not see bad intent as important in those circumstances, but clearly it is more important here because ….”
![Page 44: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQs1.10-1.11
First-in-Time v.
Alternative Types of Rules
![Page 45: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQs1.10-1.11 (Types of Rules)
• DQ1.10-1.11: Opportunity to Compare First-in-Time Rules to Alternative Types of Rules in Two Contexts:– Hunting Wild Animals (in Places You Are
Allowed to Hunt)– Allocating Parking Spaces (in Places You Are
Allowed to Park)
![Page 46: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQs1.10-1.11 (Types of Rules)
• DQ1.10-1.11: Opportunity to Compare First-in-Time Rules to Alternative Types of Rules
• Allocating Parking Spaces (in Places You Are Allowed to Park).
• Note that parking spaces usually allocated on First-in-Time Basis, e.g., – among permit-holders in Pavia Garage– among public in mall parking lots
![Page 47: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQs1.10-1.11 (Types of Rules)
• Pierson allocates property rights on a First-in-Time Basis (first to occupy unowned animal gets property rights)
• First-in-Time is a type of rule
• First-in-Time different from, e.g.,– Most Deserving Gets– Lottery (Winner Randomly Selected)– Auction (Highest Bidder Gets)
![Page 48: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQs1.10-1.11 (Types of Rules)
• Pierson allocates property rights on a First-in-Time Basis (first to occupy unowned animal gets property rights)
• First-in-Time is a type of rule• Pierson opinions agree on First-in-Time, but not on
which version– Dissent: First in Hot Pursuit– Majority: First to [Something More]
![Page 49: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQs1.10-1.11 (Types of Rules)
• Pierson allocates property rights on a First-in-Time Basis (first to occupy unowned animal gets property rights)
• First-in-Time is a type of rule
• Multiple Examples Possible– First to Actually Possess– First to Wound or Capture (if no wound)– First to See (cf. five-year-olds)
![Page 50: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQs1.10-1.11 (Types of Rules)
• Pierson opinions agree on First-in-Time, but not on which version– Dissent: First in Hot Pursuit– Majority: First to [Something More]– Possible Options After Majority Opinion (if no
trap):• First Physical Possession• First Wound• First Mortal Wound
![Page 51: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQs1.10-1.11
First-in-Time v. Other Types of Rules re
ANIMALS &PARKING
![Page 52: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQs1.10-1.11 (Types of Rules)
Alternative Approaches to First-in-Time:
CAPTURING ANIMALS?
![Page 53: ELEMENTS B POWER POINT SLIDES Class #6 Monday, August 31, 2015.](https://reader033.fdocuments.net/reader033/viewer/2022051215/5697bf8c1a28abf838c8bb37/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Pierson v. Post: DQs1.10-1.11 (Types of Rules)First-in-Time:
What Kinds of People Are Likely Winners & Losers
PARKING FOR LAW SCHOOL (among holders of same type of permit)