We learn from this week's readings that the scope of discovery in a civil case is broad. Answer the following:
Why do you think the scope of what one attorney can learn about another attorney's case is broad? Or do you think that the discovery should be more limited and there should be more trial by surprise?
The Federal Courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. Why do you think the Constitution was set up so that federal courts are limited in their jurisdiction?
Why is it important to have relevant law and relevant facts included in the issue when writing or framing your IRAC analysis?