Critical Legal Thinking Case Rubric Excellent | Good | Average | Needs Improvement | Recognize the applicable areas of law | 12.5 - 11.25 points Correctly states each area of applicable law. | 11.24 - 10.0 points Correctly states all but one area of applicable law. | 9.99 - 8.75 points Correctly states most of the areas of applicable law. | 8.74 - 0 points Misstates the areas of applicable law. | Identify the applicable principles of law | 25 - 22.5 points Correctly states each element or principle of law. | 22.4 - 20.0 points Correctly states most of the elements or principles of law. | 19.9 - 17.5 points Correctly states some of the elements or principles of law. | 17.4 - 0 points Correctly states only a few of the element or principle of law. | Identify the key facts | 25 - 22.5 points Correctly identifies each of the key facts. | 22.4 - 20.0 points Correctly identifies most of the key facts. | 19.9 - 17.5 points Correctly identifies some of the key facts. | 17.4 - 0 points Correctly identifies only a few of the key facts. | Apply the law to the facts to resolve the issue | 25 - 22.5 points States a decision that resolves the issue, supported by application of the elements or principles of law to the facts. | 22.4 - 20.0 points States a decision that resolves the issue, but fails to fully support it by application of the elements or principles of law to the facts. | 19.9 - 17.5 points States a decision that resolves the issue, but fails to support it by application of the elements or principles of law to the facts. | 17.4 - 0 points Fails to state a decision that resolves the issue. | APA format; Organization; Grammar, punctuation, and spelling | 12.5 - 11.25 points Good, logical organization with no errors. | 11.24 - 10.0 points Good, logical organization with only one or two errors. | 9.99 - 8.75 points Good, logical organization with several errors. | 8.74 - 0 points Confusing organization, or numerous errors. | Cumulative Points | Excellent | Good | Average | Needs Improvement |

1. Discuss Litigation plan 2. Advantages and disadvantages of litigation 3. Discuss pretrial planning should the company opt for litigation. Litigation is a term encompassing the use of court processes to resolve a dispute, according to the rules in place in that jurisdiction. The litigation strategy will be based on the facts of the case. As it stands currently, NoBugs Corporation has violated or breached their contract with Sterling, Inc. The evidence provided shows that the damage resulting from the defective chips is upwards of $20 million. In this particular scenario litigation might be needed in order to recover all of the losses. Also, a tort can be defined as civil wrong causing injury to a person, his or her property, or certain economic relationship. A tort claim might be another avenue worth pursuing if NoBugs Corporation was ever aware of the defect in their product prior to selling it to Sterling. However, with litigation there are many consequences that have to be considered before moving ahead. For example, this business relationship has been going on for over ten years. Seemingly, going into litigation would hurt if not destroy the business relationship for any future microchips of NoBugs to be used in Sterling’s computers. We already know that Sterling could not have built its reputation as an industry leader without NoBug’s product. Does Sterling want to proceed with litigation knowing how badly this could sever the ties? The disadvantages of going into litigation usually outweigh the advantages. Some more obvious reasons to avoid litigation are, but not limited to, the expenses incurred during litigation, The stress on employees and management, the overwhelming legal fees that begin to pile up, the distraction and time taken away from the business, the risk involved, the possibility of ruining the companies public image, and as stated previously - damaging any relationships that were formerly sustained between the two companies. Should Sterling, Inc. decide to move forward, there are several pleadings a plaintiff and defendant must file with the court to set a lawsuit into motion. This is known as the pretrial stage of a trial. Some common pleadings include a complaint, summons, motion to dismiss and motion for judgment. To elaborate a complaint is just briefly stating the facts that brought this dispute up in the first place, the reason the plaintiff is entitled to the remedy, and this is also the opportunity the plaintiff has to request a Jury Trial. The Summons is how the defendant is officially notified that there is a lawsuit in the works against them. This also gives the defendant their timeframe in which they have to respond to the complaint. A motion to dismiss is where the defendant looks to terminate the lawsuit on inadequacy. Lastly, motion for judgment or motion to dismiss can be filed directly after a complaint and answer have been filed.

Litigation. In the present case, Sterling has a strong breach of contract claim. If NoBugs knew or should have known of the defects in the chips, Sterling also has a plausible tort claim. The damages resulting from the defective chips are very substantial, which means that litigation may be necessary to recover all of sterling’s losses. Other forms of dispute resolution will probably not maximize Sterlings recoverable damages. On the other hand, Sterling could not have built its reputation as an industry leader without NoBugs, and will probably want to maintain a good business relationship with NoBugs for the foreseeable future. In addition to being expensive and time consuming, litigation may create lasting antagonisms that will destroy what was a synergistic relationship. Such litigation may also diminish the good-will sterling has built up with its other suppliers.
Arbitration on the other hand, is much more likely to preserve the business relationship between sterling and nobugs. However, because arbitrators tend to split differences down the middle, sterling is less likely to recover what it feels is the full measeure of its loss. Furthermore, because arbitration involves discovery and the adversary presentation of evidence, it often has the drawbacks of litigation – time, expense, ill-will without the advantage of maximizing recovery.
Private settlement. Sterling would be well advised to settle this dispute. The time and expense of litigation can thus be avoided, and the business relationship between the parties can be preserved. Sterling should attempt to recover its losses in a creative manner that will not cripple NoBugs. Instead of insisting on the full$20 million in one lump sum, sterling could suggest that NoBugs make a smaller initial payment, and remit the remaining amount throught discounts on future purchases of microchips. If nobugs refuses to consider reasonable settlement proposals, sterling may have to threaten litigation or even file a complaint to orce nobugs to negotiate. Before threatening or initiating litigation, sterling should be sure that it is willing to accept the ill will that even potential litigation frequently generates.

It is important to understand that in case both the parties share strong relationship with each other; so it is required to plan for Anti Plaintiff Bias, this occurs when claimant fails to act with reasonable care. What is the goal of this litigation? What resource is available as a proof to prove plaintiff position in the court? At first it is suggested to opt for out of court settlement...

Analysis- while nobugs did replace all the chips that caused the sterling computers to explode, there was still about $20 in damage. Arbitration or litigation could be initiated against Nobugs, and there would be a strong case for breach of contract. In essence, it does not matter that the miscalibrated chip caused a previously unrelated engineering defect to mis-perform, had the chips been correctly calibrated, the flaw would not have occurred. There is clearly a breach since nobugs failed to provide an agreed upon product that, in turn, caused damage to sterling’s client’s computers.

That being said, sterling and nobugs are almost inexorably tied together. For the past decade, nobugs has been the only producer meeting sterling’s strict specifications; thus sterling could not have built its reputation as a state of the art computer manufacturer without nobugs, and nobugs would not have been able to grow as rapidly and provide its investors with a lucrative rate of return. It is doubtful that sterling could simply go into the market and immediately find another chip manufacturer; and if sterling drops its contract with nobugs then nobugs would need to search for the other markets – which may take time and cause months of unprofitability.

Bagley, C. (2013). Foundation of the Legal and Regulatory Environment. In Managers and the Legal Environment (7th ed., pp. 58-59). Mason, OH: South-Western.
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/~nesson/Reading--Pre-Trial_Procedures.pdf