SELECCIÓN DE TEXTOS.

Este trabajo de
compilación contiene los textos que se
utilizarán para el dictado de la materia. Los
textos ilustran los distintos ejes temáticos
abordados para la enseñanza de las técnicas de
comprensión lectora en lengua extranjera

LECTOCOMPRENSIÓN
– INGLÉS MATERIAL
DIDÁCTICO ALUMNOS
UNIDAD 4

DEPARTAMENTO DE
IDIOMAS

UNIDAD 4:
DERECHO PROCESAL CIVIL

2
ÍNDICE DE CONTENIDOS
Texto 1: The Basic Steps in a Civil Lawsuit: Civil Law Process

Texto 2: Civil Process In Graphs

Texto 3: Common Interpretation Seventh Amendment

Texto 4: Pros And Cons Of Having A Jury System

Cartoon: Cons Of Having A Jury System

Texto 5: Who’s Suing Who In The Mobile Phones Market?

(Graph & Text)

Apéndice 1: MAGNA CARTA MUSE AND MENTOR, Trial by

Jury

Apéndice 2: CHART CIVIL PROCESS

 3
Texto 1: The Basic Steps in a Civil Lawsuit: Civil Law Process

Fuente: http://www.shestokas.com/general-law/the-basic-steps-in-a-civil-lawsuit-civil-law-process/

october 25, 2012 by david j. shestokas

Thanks to television dramas and criminal trial news coverage criminal law procedure is
familiar to many. How a civil lawsuit proceeds is less well known.

The process and purpose of civil and criminal law differ. In a criminal case, the
government seeks to impose penalties upon an individual for violating the law. Those
penalties can include fines, loss of freedom or even death. The purpose of the penalties
varies from revenge, deterrence, rehabilitation or incapacitation to protect the
community.

A civil lawsuit differs in that it is to resolve matters between private parties. One person
believes another has harmed him, and the courts are available to resolve the problem.

In a civil lawsuit, an individual or corporation called the plaintiff brings another party,
referred to as the defendant, to court. The plaintiff asks a judge to order the defendant
either to pay money or perform a specific action. A civil suit may involve family law
matters, a contract dispute or a tort.

A tort is a wrongful act, not including a breach of contract or trust, that results in injury to
another’s person, property, or reputation and for which the injured party is entitled to
compensation. Intentional torts include battery, libel and slander. Negligent torts are the
result of conduct that causes unintended injury. Auto accidents, medical malpractice or
product liability are examples of negligent torts. An attorney well versed in a particular
legal area is important as each has rules unique to it, though the basic principles that follow
apply in most instances.
Initial Steps in a Civil Lawsuit, Complaint & Answer

The plaintiff, or injured party, typically with the help of an attorney, files an initial
document called a complaint, the first pleading in a civil action, stating the cause of
action.

The plaintiff’s complaint asks for damages or relief from a defendant, who is alleged to
have caused the injury. The complaint outlines the legal and factual reasons why the
plaintiff believes the defendant is responsible for his injury.

The clerk of the court then issues a summons to the defendant. Either the sheriff or a
licensed process server formally delivers the summons to the defendant. The summons
provides notice of the lawsuit and a copy of the complaint.

The defendant or his lawyer has a specified time to either personally appear in court. The
defendant is required to file a document referred to

4
as an “answer”. The answer addresses the facts and the legal claims in the complaint. The
answer tells the court which facts in the complaint the defendant agrees with, and those
with which he disagrees.

Motions in the Early Stages

Once the complaint and answer have been filed with the court, attorneys for both sides
consider proper motions. A motion is a request to the court to issue an order. The defense
may file a motion to dismiss, indicating the complaint does not contain facts making the
defendant liable to the plaintiff. A defendant may file a motion to dismiss before his
answer. The plaintiff may file a motion for summary judgment, which says the parties do
not disagree about the facts of the case and that those facts make the defendant liable to the
plaintiff.

If a court grants either of these early motions, the lawsuit may end. This is why motions to
dismiss or for summary judgment are usually the first parts of a lawsuit. If these motions
are denied (or not filed as inappropriate), then the lawsuit proceeds.

Discovery and Pre-trial

The next part of the process is discovery. During discovery, the parties exchange
information and documents related to the claim in the complaint and defenses asserted in
the answer. During discovery, depositions may be conducted. A deposition is testimony
given under oath by people with information related to the lawsuit recorded by a court
reporter.
As discovery proceeds, the parties have pre-trial conferences with the judge. The parties
advise the judge of discovery progress and in some situations discuss possible
settlements. The judge often aids in negotiations and sets schedules for completion of
discovery.

During the pre-trial phase, the lawyers may request the judge to bar specific evidence,
witnesses or arguments as legally improper. The judge grants or denies the motions. Upon
completion of discovery, decisions on pre-trial motions and failure to reach a settlement the
matter is ready to go to trial.

Trial and Judgment

At the trial, the plaintiff presents evidence first to a judge either in a bench trial or a group
of citizens in a jury. After the plaintiff presents evidence, the defendant has an opportunity
to present the defense side of the case. The plaintiff has the burden of proving his case by a
preponderance of the evidence. This means that it is more likely than not, that the claims of
the plaintiff are true. This standard of evidence is much lower than the criminal standard of
beyond a reasonable doubt.

Both sides present their cases, and then the judge or jury decides. If the judge or jury finds
against the plaintiff, the case is over. The judge enters a judgment in favor of the defendant
releasing the defendant from liability for the plaintiff’s claims.

If the judge or jury finds for the plaintiff, the defendant is found to be liable and
judgment is entered for the plaintiff. The court then awards

5
damages (money) and/or orders the defendant perform a specific act. This order
concludes the trial process and is a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

Appeals
The losing party may file an appeal if they believe the outcome was incorrect legally. An
appellate court may dismiss the appeal, hear and affirm the judgment, reverse it, or send
it back to the trial court with instructions to correct legal errors. Many lawsuits go
between the appellate court and trial court multiple times before final resolution.

Enforcement
When a judgment becomes final in favor of the defendant, the plaintiff may not file suit on
the same basis in the future. If the ruling favors the plaintiff, the defendant must observe all
the terms of the judgment. Failure of the defendant to obey the judgment places the
defendant in contempt of court and brings the danger of prosecution and other penalties for
that contempt. Additionally, a plaintiff with a judgment may seek to enforce it by obtaining
a court order to seize the property of the defendant to satisfy the defendant’s debt. A final
judgement against a defendant can be collected even if the defendant has moved to another
state. This is due to the Constitution’s “Full Faith and Credit Clause”.
Twists and Turns

The above outlines the basics of how a civil lawsuit proceeds. There can be many twists
and turns along the way, with the attorneys filing many different motions. There are time
deadlines and extensions. The process is extremely important. A plaintiff or defendant can
be completely right on the facts but fail to follow the process and lose the case. While a
party to a lawsuit should have an understanding of the basic process, each area of law has
its own quirks. The rules for a breach of contract, intentional torts, negligent torts, family
law, or malpractice differ from each other. An attorney should be familiar with not only the
general process, but also the specific area of law.
 6
Texto 2: CIVIL PROCESS IN GRAPHS

GRÁFICO 1 Fuente: https://www.google.com.ar/search?

q=trial+flowchart&rlz=1C1CHVN_esAR571AR572&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=666&tb m=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X

GRÁFICO 2

Fuente :http://academic.regis.edu/jriley/403%20Civil%20Actions.gif
 7
Texto 3: COMMON INTERPRETATION SEVENTH
AMENDMENT
fuente: https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendments/amendment-vii

Common Interpretation

THE SEVENTH AMENDMENT

By Renée Lettow Lerner and Suja A. Thomas

To many Americans, jury trials seem to be the normal way of deciding civil cases.
Television programs and movies show exciting scenes of juries deciding important non-
criminal disputes involving individuals, government officials, and companies.

The reality is different. Juries decide less than one percent of the civil cases that are
filed in court. This lack of jury trials may seem strange, as the Seventh Amendment
guarantees the right to jury trial in certain civil cases.

There are two main types of court systems in the United States: federal and state. The
Seventh Amendment requires civil jury trials only in federal courts. This Amendment is
unusual. The U.S. Supreme Court has required states to protect almost every other right in
the Bill of Rights, such as the right to criminal jury trial, but the Court has not required
states to hold civil jury trials. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad Co. v. Bombolis (1916).
Nearly all of the states, however, have rights to civil jury trial in certain cases in their state
constitutions. The United States is almost the only nation that continues to require civil
jury trials. Civil juries similar to those in the United States are not part of the legal
traditions of the Continent of Europe or the legal systems derived from those traditions,
including in Latin America and Asia. Even in England and its former colonies of Canada,
Australia, and New Zealand, civil jury trial has virtually been abolished.

Why did some persons at the founding of the United States think that civil jury trial was so
important that it should be guaranteed in the federal and state constitutions? To understand
the Seventh Amendment, we need to go back into history and the English

8
legal system. Much of the legal system in the United States, and especially the
provisions of the Bill of Rights, are based on America’s English roots.

The civil jury was an old English institution, older even than the criminal jury. Since the
middle ages, the English had used juries of persons not trained in law to decide certain civil
cases. There were always some English courts that did not use juries. In these courts,
judges decided cases. The most important of these juryless courts was Chancery, also
known as Equity.

In the eighteenth century, as the desire of American colonists for independence from
Britain grew, the jury in America became more important. The British government claimed
that Americans had to obey laws enacted by the British Parliament, in which Americans
had no representation. Americans did participate on colonial juries, and these juries became
a way for Americans to govern themselves. As tensions with Britain rose, juries nullified
(refused to follow) hated British laws, especially laws for collecting taxes. Because colonial
juries had been valuable in the struggle against Britain, Americans put rights to civil and
criminal jury trial into their new state constitutions immediately after declaring
independence in 1776.

By the time the federal Constitutional Convention met in Philadelphia in 1787, opinions
about the civil jury were more mixed. Because state civil juries had been sympathetic to
debtors, Federalists in particular feared nullification of the laws of contract. For this and
other reasons, the federal Constitution that was presented to the states for ratification did
not include a right to civil jury trial.
In the state ratifying conventions for the federal Constitution, Anti-Federalists strongly
protested the lack of a right to civil jury trial. They expressed concerns about debtors, and
also argued that juries could protect litigants from bad laws passed by the legislature,
tyrannical actions by the executive, and corrupt or biased judges. Fearing that a second
constitutional convention might be called if a right to civil jury trial were not included in a
federal Bill of Rights, James Madison drafted what became the Seventh Amendment.

The Seventh Amendment has two clauses. The first, known as the Preservation Clause,
provides: “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty
dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.” This clause sets out the types of cases
juries are required to decide. The second clause, known as the Re-examination Clause,
declares: “no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United
States, than according to the rules of the common law.” This clause prevents federal judges
from overturning jury verdicts in certain ways.

The term “common law,” used twice in the Amendment, can be confusing. Today, the
term “common law” often means law declared by judges, as opposed to law enacted by
legislatures. In the Seventh Amendment, the term “common law” means the law and

9
procedure of the courts that used juries, as opposed to Equity and other courts that did
not use juries.

In interpreting the Seventh Amendment, judges soon encountered a problem. To which

“common law” courts was the Amendment referring? The states had different civil jury
practices, and the federal courts were new. The United States Supreme Court announced a
solution. The term “common law” in the Seventh Amendment meant the common law of
England. Parsons v. Bedford (1830). A century later, the Supreme Court formally declared
that the Amendment was to be iterpreted according to the common law of England at the
time the Amendment was ratified, that is, in 1791. Dimick v. Schiedt (1935).

This interpretation is known as the historical test. Generally, the types of cases that juries
decide and the ways that judges can review their verdicts are supposed to resemble the
practice in English common law courts in 1791. The Supreme Court has stated that the
Amendment preserves the “substance” of the right, not “mere matters of form or
procedure.” Baltimore & Carolina Line, Inc. v. Redman (1935). Departures from the
English practice in 1791 have been permitted, including using six jurors instead of
 twelve.Colgrove v. Battin (1973).

10
Texto 4: PROS AND CONS OF HAVING A JURY SYSTEM
Fuente: http://thecanadianjurysystem.weebly.com/pros--cons.html
PROS AND CONS OF HAVING A JURY SYSTEM  Very efficient
system, with
approximately 800 years of success.
 The Canadian Jury System reflects
Canada’s democratic society by encouraging citizens to take part and get involved in their
civil duties.
 The Jury System is a crucial aspect
of the Canadian legal system because it ensures that the jurors are equitable.   It prevents

the partiality of the judge alone and it reinforces Canada’s democratic values by having an

equal say from each juror.   Justices have their own personal
views and values. By having a jury for the case, the fate of the accused is not solely in one
person's hands. Every juror has an opportunity to put in their opinion instead of just one
person making a decision based on what they think. The accused may, because of their
status, be in conflict with the judge's values and views. For example, if the accused holds
membership in a particular political party and the judge has their own views on politics, there

may be an unfair decision made.   Unanimous verdicts block any

biased opinions from occurring among the jurors.
 It is very time consuming. Also
depends on how serious the case is. For example if it is a 1st degree murder case, it will take

longer for the decision to be made. Therefore causing the jury to stay longer.   The jury

may not always consist of the smartest and brilliant people. Some of them may not have
received enough education to actually make a call on whether the accused is guilty or not. 

 Horrific cases can seriously affect

jurors who have to sit through some agonizing or disturbing evidence.   Judge has to

explain legal matters to

the jurors.   Jurors are basically deciding what will

happen to the accused. This is an issue because we are talking about the fate of a person(s)
and it may not be dealt with properly or with enough thought. There may be bias jurors who
will purposely make an unfair decision. This is dishonest and biased towards the accused. It
is still not a fool proof system. Juries have definitely made mistakes and wrongly convicted
people  A jury can be quite expensive and
costly because jury duty allows for the jurors to be compensated for lost wages.   Juries

do not have to give any reason

for verdicts and therefore can easily be influenced by impressive lawyers or even judges.
They can change their opinion any time they want.
11
Texto 4: Cartoon: CONS OF HAVING A JURY SYSTEM
Fuente: http://es.slideshare.net/yunudeni/common-law-vs-civil-law- 1435418?
next_slideshow=1
 12
Texto 5: WHO’S SUING WHO IN THE MOBILE PHONES MARKET?

http://www.cultofmac.com/61882/handy-mobile-lawsuit-flow-chart-graphic/

Handy Mobile Lawsuit Flow Chart [Graphic]

BY LONNIE LAZAR • 2:21 PM, OCTOBER 5, 2010
 13
Take a look at the litigious melee going on among companies trying to
squeeze profits out of the mobile communications landscape. It’s a wonder
we have phones and operating systems at all, isn’t it?

Interestingly, the one suit against Google by Oracle is somewhat misleading,

given that many of the suits represented by the flying arrows in the graphic
relate to Google’s Android operating system, including all of the ones filed by
Microsoft.

Microsoft, with its Windows Mobile 7 OS about to ship, is asserting

intellectual property infringement cases against Motorola and HTC, claiming
Google’s Android operating system runs afoul of patents it holds for several
important tasks handled by today’s new generation of smart phones.
Specifically the software giant says Android copies its patented methods for
handling email, contacts and calendar synchronisation, scheduling meetings
and notifying applications of changes in signal and battery strength.

Via [The Guardian]

 14

UNIDAD 4:

DERECHO PROCESAL CIVIL

MATERIAL ADICIONAL
 15
APÉNDICE 1: MAGNA CARTA MUSE AND MENTOR, Trial by Jury

https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/magna-carta-muse-and-mentor/trial-by-jury.html

Former U.S. President Benjamin Harrison served as plaintiff’s counsel in the 1895 trial over the estate of James Morrison
of Richmond, Indiana. The
trial, which lasted from January 2 until May 10, 1895, was the
longest jury trial in the United States up to that time.
Prints and Photographs Division, Library of Congress The
right to a trial by jury, one of the most
time-honored inheritances from Magna Carta in United States law, refers to
the guarantee that courts will depend on a body of citizens to render
judgments in most civil and criminal cases. The origins of the jury trial
precede the creation of Magna Carta. However, Chapter 39 of King John’s
Magna Carta includes the guarantee that no free man may suffer punishment
without “the lawful judgment of his peers.” By this measure the barons sought
to force the king to delegate part of his judicial authority to men who were
peers of the individual on trial. While Magna Carta did not institute the jury
system in the modern sense, its political intent—to prevent the king’s
domination of the courts— inspired later generations to view the right to a
trial by jury as one of the basic safeguards of freedom from arbitrary
government.

Eighteenth-century Americans viewed the right to a jury trial as one of the

essential liberties of a free country. They saw the jury as an independent
deliberative body that could refuse to cooperate with an unjust court or law.
Although the United States Constitution recognized a right to a jury trial in
criminal cases, the states demanded a constitutional amendment to guarantee a
jury trial in civil cases as well, leading to the creation of the Seventh
Amendment.

16
APÉNDICE 2: CHART: CIVIL PROCESS

Fuente: http://jec.unm.edu/manuals-resources/case-flow-charts/magistrate-court/civil-flow-chart/image_preview
17