Question

8. When the victim of a defamatory statement is a public figure:

a. the elements of the tort of defamation are exactly the same;

b. the public figure has no right to sue for defamation;

c. the public figure can only sue business or political enemies or defamation;

d. the public figure is also required to prove actual malice; that is, the Defendant made the defamatory statement knowing the statement was false.

19. A distinctive mark, logo or name, can be entitled to trademark

protection, even without formal filing, provided the public has formed

__________between the mark, logo, or name and the product in

question.

a. strict adherence;

b. technical meaning;

c. secondary meaning

d. none of the above.

20. Regarding search and seizure in Washington, which statement is most accurate?

a. there are situations where the right to be free from an unreasonable search and seizure is greater under Washington law than under federal law;

b. there is no state law concerning search and seizure;

c. there are no situations where the right to be free from an unreasonable search and seizure is greater under Washington law than under federal law;

d. none of the above statements are true.

21. _________is the Latin term referring to the requisite criminal act.

a. .actus reus;

b .mens rea

c.caveat emptor

d.res ipsa loquitor

22. The police show up at the door of Castleberry’s home without a warrant and wish to search his home. A search without a warrant is:

a. per se unreasonable

b. permitted under federal law, but not in Washington;

c. only done incident to an arrest;

d. all of the above

Answer 1

18. - (d). the public figure is also required to prove actual malice; that is, the Defendant made the defamatory statement knowing the statement was false.

explanation: Generally, what defamation means is a false and unprivileged statement of fact that is harmful to someone's reputation, and published "with fault," meaning as a result of negligence or malice. State laws often define defamation in specific ways.

A private figure claiming defamation (For example - your neighbor or your roommate) only has to prove you acted negligently, which is to say that a "reasonable person" would not have published the defamatory statement.

Under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, as set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1964 Case, New York Times v Sullivan, in which a public figure attempts to bring an action for defamation, the public figure must prove an additional element: that the statement was made with "actual malice". Courts have upheld this rule based on the U.S. belief that the public should be able to freely discuss national issues without fear of repercussions. If a public official or public figure believes that he or she has been defamed, he or she must prove with convincing evidence that the statement is false. The public official also must prove that the defamer showed reckless disregard for that falsity, either because the defamer knew the statement was false or should have known. Herbert v. Lando, 441 U.S. 153, 99 S.Ct. 1635, 60 L.Ed.2d 115 (1979).

19. (c) Secondary Meaning.

As a concept, secondary meaning acknowledges that words with a regular and distinctive meaning of their own could become synonymous with a specific product. The general public then specifically identifies a product by this secondary meaning. The plaintiff is also required to show that the main significance of the secondary meaning is related to the producer rather than a product.

21. (a) Actus Reus

means ‘A guilty act’–The prohibited conduct or behaviour that the law seeks to prevent.

22. (b). permitted under federal law, but not in Washington

As per Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 10.79.040,

Search without warrant unlawful—Penalty.

(1) It shall be unlawful for any police officer or other peace officer to enter and search any private dwelling house or place of residence without the authority of a search warrant issued upon a complaint as by law provided.

(2) Any police officer or other peace officer violating the provisions of this section is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

Please hit thumbs up if it helps. Have a great day ahead!