Fans were incensed, as were several members of the LucasArts team, who left to found their own game company: Telltale Games. The defense raises a Best Evidence objection, both to the copy and to Abrams' testimony, arguing that the copy is a forgery that does not accurately reflect the contents of the original.Max: Irreverent reply which hints at mental instability!Ī long-awaited sequel to Sam & Max Hit the Road was announced by LucasArts in 2002, but in March of 2004 the project was unceremoniously canceled. Mazo forced her (on threat of dismissal) to change the '1' to a '9.' Before altering the form, however, she made a photocopy showing her prior entry. Abrams wrote the number '1' on the admitting form, and she testifies that after the failed surgery Dr. Abrams testifies that Gretchen told her she had eaten a meal just one hour prior to coming to the hospital. In a dramatic development during rebuttal, Gretchen's attorney calls Sally Abrams, the nurse who admitted Gretchen to St. Anne's introduces her original admitting record, which shows that nine hours had passed since she last ate. Mazo admits that it would be negligent to place Gretchen under anesthesia if she had eaten only one hour earlier. After the operation she was permanently comatose, living on life support, and her baby died unborn. While under a general anesthetic, she vomited in her oxygen mask, which blocked the flow of oxygen to her brain. At the time, Gretchen was pregnant and had been admitted for emergency surgery. Mazo for negligence in an operation that caused her permanent brain damage. Problem 14-D: nine hours or one? Gretchen sues St. How can you reply to Eva's objection? If Dan can testify that 'I made this photocopy from the very agreement Eva and I signed, and it accurately reproduces our contract,' should the judge resolve the issue produced by the conflict between Dan and Eva, or should the jury decide it? If the jury should decide it, does that mean that the copy should be admitted? Hasn't Eva raised a 'genuine issue' about the authenticity of the original? We've raised a genuine question about authenticity, and you cannot properly admit this purported copy-this forgery, if you want to call it what it really is.' You are counsel for Dan.

Therefore this purported copy-whatever it is-cannot be admitted. Counsel for Eva then states, 'Your Honor, there never was such an original as this. Our agreement, the original that we signed, never said that. We did have an agreement, and we did type it out, in a way that looks sort of like this, but this says that I promised not to go to work for any of Dan's competitors, and what we signed never contained anything like that. Q: Is that a copy of a written agreement between you and Dan? A: I have no idea what that's a copy of. In proceedings in aid of the objection, Eva takes the stand, and testifies thus: Q (defense counsel): Have you examined this so-called photocopy? A (Eva): Yes, I have. Problem 14-C: there never was such an original Dan sues Eva in contract and offers in evidence what he claims to be a 'photocopy of the original agreement.' On inspecting the proffered photocopy and consulting with his client, counsel for Eva raises a Best Evidence objection. Barton here had just finished lunch at Sebastian's where she drank three glasses of wine just before the accident, isn't that true? To each question Barton's counsel objects, 'Improper as beyond the scope of direct, Your Honor.' How should the judge rule in each instance, and why? What arguments do you expect from Barton and Felsen? Barton here had turned clear around in her seat and was looking out the back window of the car? Q: Tell me, Mr. Dreeves, that at the time of the accident Ms. Barton are seeing each other socially, isn't that right? Q: Isn't it true, Mr. During her case-in-chief, Barton calls Carl Dreeves, who testifies on direct examination that 'the Buick ran a red light.' On cross-examination, Felsen's counsel asks the following questions: Q: Now Mr. In a Rules jurisdiction, Barton sues Felsen for personal injuries and property damage. Problem 1-A: how did it happen? At the intersection of Folsom and Valmont, two cars collide-a yellow Fiat driven by Abby Barton, in which Carl Dreeves rode as passenger, and a blue Buick driven by Eric Felsen.

Sam and max lance police game