What was the court rule and legal principle in the case of Hagberg v California Federal Bank?
The case of Hagberg v California Federal Bank contains so much legal mumbo jumbo that it would take a good lawyer to explain it instead of the following simplistic version. Ms Hagberg presented a Smith Barney check to a teller at California Federal Bank. The teller looked at the check and decided something looked wrong. Smith Barney's checks look perfect. That check did not look perfect. The teller called for management as she had been instructed to do in such a case. The manager called Smith Barney. Smith Barney said the check was stolen. The managers called the cops and described the woman as hispanic. The cops came and arrested the woman and took her to a room to interview her. Then Smith Barney called back and said the check was good. After that Ms Hagberg took the case to a civil rights court because of the way the bank management had described her to the cops. The appeal court determined that a persons description given to the cops is privileged information and not slander.
The first three articles of the constitution established the rules and separate power of the three branches of the federal government. An executive branch led by the president, and a federal judiciary headed by the supreme court. The last four articles frames the principle of federalim. The tenth amendment confirms its federal characteristics.
The lowest general level in the Federal System is the Federal District Court, which sits in a defined federal district. An example would be the "Federal district Court for the Western District of Oklahoma" This district court answers to the Circuit Court ( e.g. 10th Circuit etc.) and then to the US Supreme court by Certiori
The case must involve a federal question (matter of federal or constitutional law or US treaties) to be heard in a federal constitutional court (US District Courts, US Court of International Trade, US Court of Appeals Circuit Courts, Supreme Court of the United States). Cases involving monetary claims against the US are heard in the US Court of Federal Claims (not a constitutional court, but a federal court, nevertheless).
In the state system, the highest appellate court is the State Supreme Court (or equivalent); In the federal system AND overall, the highest court is the US Supreme Court. The courts work in two systems, the state courts and the federal courts. The state courts start off in the local trial level court, followed by the state court of appeal, and then to the state supreme court. The federal system works in regions. At the…
The highest court in the federal system is the United States Supreme Court, with nine Supreme Court Justices. The states do not share jurisdiction with the federal court, so the states courts are not a part of the federal court system. Each state decides what it calls its highest court. In Texas, there is a separate court for civil versus criminal cases.
Why can it be said that the US District Courts are the principle trial courts in the federal judiciary?
Cases will be filed in federal court if the plaintiff and the tobacco company are from different states. However, if a plaintiff sues the local stores he/she bought from the case may proceed in state court. However, tobacco companies will remove to federal court under theories that federal warning laws preempt state claims. A federal judge then decides to keep the case in federal court or remand to state court.