Waiting for answer This question has not been answered yet. You can hire a professional tutor to get the answer.
BUS12 TWO QUESTIONS
3-2. Motions. When and for what purpose is each of the following motions made? Which of them would be appropriate if a defendant claimed that the only issue between the parties was a question of law and that the law was favorable to the defendant’s position? (See Dismissals and Judgments before Trial.)
A motion for judgment on the pleadings.
A motion for a directed verdict.
A motion for summary judgment.
A motion for judgment n.o.v.
3-9. A QUESTION OF ETHICS: Service of Process.
Narnia Investments, Ltd., filed a suit in a Texas state court against several defendants, including Harvestons Securities, Inc., a securities dealer. (Securities are documents evidencing the ownership of a corporation, in the form of stock, or debts owed by it, in the form of bonds.) Harvestons is registered with the state of Texas. Thus, a party may serve a summons and a copy of a complaint on Harvestons by serving the Texas Securities Commissioner. In this case, the return of service indicated that process was served on the commissioner “by delivering to JoAnn Kocerek defendant, in person, a true copy of this [summons] together with the accompanying copy(ies) of the [complaint].” Harvestons did not file an answer, and Narnia obtained a default judgment against the defendant for $365,000, plus attorneys’ fees and interest. Five months after this judgment, Harvestons filed a motion for a new trial, which the court denied. Harvestons appealed to a state intermediate appellate court, claiming that it had not been served in strict compliance with the rules governing service of process. [Harvestons Securities, Inc. v. Narnia Investments, Ltd., 218 S.W.3d 126 (Tex.App.—Houston 2007)] (See Pretrial Procedures.)
Harvestons asserted that Narnia’s service was invalid, in part, because “the return of service states that process was delivered to ‘JoAnn Kocerek’” and did not show that she “had the authority to accept process on behalf of Harvestons or the Texas Securities Commissioner.” Should such a detail, if it is required, be strictly construed and applied? Should it apply in this case? Explain.
