1. Compare the sentences. What meaning do the underlined grammatical structures have? Translate the sentences.

1. Today a federal court in a diversity case applies the same principles of tort law, contract law, and so on, as would be applied if the case were in state court.

2. If they had gone to federal court instead, would the federal court have applied different law to determine if the Audi’s gas tank was defective?

3. If they had sued in New York, would New York’s tort law have applied to the case instead of Oklahoma’s law?

2. Compare the sentences. What meaning do the underlined grammatical structures have? Translate the sentences.

1. Therefore, they might logically have brought suit in the courts of Oklahoma, New York or Arizona.

2. The Robinsons brought their case in the District Court in Creek County, Oklahoma, part of the Oklahoma state court system, but they could have “made a federal case out of it” by brining suit in the federal courts.

Exercise 10. Discuss the following.

1. In what ways is the federal judicial system different from the states judicial system?

2. In your opinion, what are the advantages and disadvantages of having state court systems and a parallel federal system?

3. What do you know about constitutional limitations and the due process clause? What purposes do they serve?

4. What does the concept of jurisdiction mean according to Russian law?

5. Compare the systems of courts in the Russian Federation and in the United States. Do they have much in common? Are they completely different?