What happens if you have two competing legal obligations?

Factual Questions
1

What happens if a person has two legal obligations (i.e. to do X or not do X, and also to do Y and not do Y) and they are either logically mutually exclusive or practically so? Do they have to pick one and take their lumps regarding the other one, or is there a hierarchy/rubric to determine which one he is legally required to obey and which he may safely disregard (e.g. you should obey a Federal law before a State or Local one, choose the misdemeanor over the felony, choose the 5 year felony over the 10 year felony, choose based on your jurisdiction of domicile (if the obligations are from two separate jurisdictions), choose based on the jurisdiction you are in (if from two different jurisdictions))? I am talking about theory here - so the fact that one choice may be unlikely to be prosecuted isn’t what I’m really after.

E.g.

  1. John has received a deportation order from the United States. He must leave the US by December 1st and may not return for 5 years. If he willfully remains in the US beyond that time, he is committing an offense. John also has a Summons to appear in a California court on December 2nd. Willful failure to appear is an offense. What should John do? Should he violate the court order to appear in order to obey the deportation order, or disobey the deportation order to obey the California court order?

  2. John is a public school teacher in Philadelphia, PA. If he willfully fails to show up for work, he could be charged with child neglect/dereliction of duty/something. John is, however, on Probation in Camden, NJ and his probation officer refused John’s request to travel outside New Jersey for work purposes (he used to commute regularly until he was put on probation). What should John do? Should he violate Probation in order to fulfill his duty to the school system, or should he obey his Probation and let the children go unsupervised?

What would happen if the two competing duties were from two different countries (e.g. an order to report for military duty in Canada versus an order to appear in New York traffic court)?

These are just examples - feel free to mix and match as applicable. I made up the scenarios and selected jurisdictions, so it might be the case that the obligations aren’t as strict in the jurisdictions mentioned - feel free to substitute other ones and other scenarios.

Might it depend on how culpable John is? E.g. if he is truly morally innocent or if he was reckless in putting himself into a “no win” scenario.

2

IANAL but my guess - a criminal court order (probation, etc.) trumps a contract obligation. No contractual obligation can require you to break the law. In that case, something like “force majeur” may apply.

As for deportation vs. subpoena - you are easily able to leave the country any time; what happens after that is up to the government. You can apply for permision to enter, and they can deny you - which is then their fault. You have met your obligation by showing up at the border (or the embassy for a visa) and being denied entry. The court cannot punish you for something you have no control over, as long as you made an honest effort to comply. Presumably deportation comes with an order not to show upat the border for entry for 5 years.

In the rule of competing court orders, the biggest one wins. If A orders you to sell the house an split the profits with the ex, and B says you cannot sell; then one side or another can appeal the results to a higher court who decides which judge has final say. Somewhere up there is a court which has jurisdiction over both judges. Usually one court will not involve itself in matters already in litigation in another location. I cannot sue you both in California and Texas for the same cause.

3

I don’t think there is a general preference to obey federal over state laws in general. If anything, it would probably be the opposite because most criminal law is at the state level but it would depend on the specific circumstances. Medical marijuana is illegal in all states under federal law for example but some states say it is legal in theirs and seem to win that battle.

4

People being held in jail are not prosecuted for missing a summons, IIRC.

5

There are different things you could do. In your examples, generally speaking, there are no conflicting duties. In your example A, I’d call the California court and tell them I was being deported, could they move up the other hearing (if I cared). Or file a notice with the California court telling them I was being deported. I’m choosing that one, since it’s the later in time.

For example B, (leaving aside the practical solution of calling the school so they could get a sub) I suppose there’s a way to appeal probation rules. But if an action was brought against John for failing to show up to school, he’d have a defense of impossibility.

You have a couple of other options: file a declaratory judgment action, asking the court to declare what your duties are in the event of competing legal obligations. There’s also an interpleader action, in the appropriate circumstances. If two competing people claim a piece of property or some money, the person holding the property files an interpleader action, names the competing claimants as defendants, and tells the judge to tell him who to pay.

Not really. There isn’t necessarily a higher court with jurisdiction over both judges. But there are circumstances under which a federal district court judge can issue a writ of mandate or mandamus to a state court, telling that judge what to do. But mandamus generally will only issue if the judge to be compelled has made a mistake and refuses to remedy it.

But generally speaking, if you have conflicting orders and mandamus doesn’t work, you figure out which order you like least, and then try to convince that judge to change or stay his order.

Also, you can sue someone in both California and Texas for the same cause. When you do, I then go to one of the judges and ask that judge to stay the case pending the outcome in the other jurisdiction. If a case is stayed, that means it’s held in abeyance, but not dismissed; if for some reason the other jurisdiction gets rid of the case, I can then return and seek to lift the stay and continue the case.

Or I file a forum non conveniens motion in, say, Texas, and ask the Texas judge to transfer the Texas case to California; once transferred, I then relate the Texas case to the California case, and then consider consolidating both cases so they’re all one action.

Usually, something like this works to stop parallel litigation, but sometimes you get an ornery judge.

6

No. We’ve had nullification crises before and the Federal government always wins. The most recent example was in the 1960s over Civil Rights; the biggest example was in the 1860s over Civil Rights.

The reason medical marijuana hasn’t caused an official nullification crisis yet is because the Federal government is not pursuing it as strongly as it could.

7

Mods, we should probably move this to imho.

Anyway, let’s assume that the school says that no subs are available and he’d better be in the classroom in the morning or else he will be reported as a child neglecter. If John decides to obey that instead, and is hauled before a NJ court for a Probation Violation, could he raise a defense of impossibility in the other direction and say “Hey, I couldn’t obey my terms of Probation because Philly demanded that I be present there under pain of prosecution for child neglect”? That’s the gravamen of my question - how does John select which one to obey (or can he pick and choose the option he likes best and claim impossibility as a defense against the one he didn’t like as much)

8

Or, what happens if John gets Summons from two different courts for the same time? E.g. an order to appear on Dec 1 , 9 AM in County Court of Camden, NJ and another order to appear on Dec 1, 9 AM in Baltimore City Court?

Does it depend on how “high” the court is? E.g. California Superior Court order beats Virginia District Court

Does it depend on the seniority of the judge?

Does it depend on the reason for the summons? E.g. summons to answer for a felony charge beats summons to answer for a misdemeanor charge beats summons to appear for a civil lawsuit beats summons to appear as a witness (to a case you are not a party to), which beats summons to appear for jury duty?

9

I’m not understanding the child neglecter thing. I’ve had plenty of teachers call in sick. It’s not even up to them to call in the sub. Also you said willfully, and being ordered not to cross a line isn’t a willful act on John’s part.

Now, John could get fired if he can’t ever come to work again. Of course he could also be fired if the school district finds out what he did to get put on probation. And if I were John, I’d be jumping up and down about my probation officer over-reaching his mandate and putting my job at risk.

What would happen if it were an army base, rather than a school?

10

Makes sense, since I believe that it is an offense for a soldier to be AWOL. But, in that case, would the duty to serve in the US Army at a base in Pennsylvania trump a NJ probation order to remain in NJ? My guess is yes, because the Army is Federal.

11

I mean, as a practical matter, none of these situations would arise. If I got two summonses for the same day and time, I’d call one (or both) of the courts, talk to the clerk, who’d talk to the judge, who’d change the hearing time.

Also, if there’s no neat legal procedure (like a writ of mandate) that fits the situation, a lawyer just makes up a filing to alert the court and hopes it all works. So, for example, I’d file an ex parte application for an order shortening time on one of the hearings, or for an order doing something. (An ex parte application doesn’t mean the other side doesn’t get notice of the request; it means that there isn’t enough time before the Very Bad Thing happens to go through regular channels.)

It does not depend on the seniority of the judge or the type of court (California Superior Court is a trial-level court, as is Virginia District Court, so they’re at the same level). The reason for the summons is probably how a court will ultimately decide which trumps. In reality, however, the law moves like molasses. This isn’t an issue of two trains suddenly colliding; it’s more like an issue of two snails slowly creeping towards each other over the course of months. John could totally see it coming and do something about it.

As for poor John and the mean school, as a practical matter, he should quit. Then no legal obligation to the school. Also, I’d look at it this way. If he violates probation, he returns to prison generally without much of a hearing. Oooo, except that as a condition of his probation he probably has to obey all laws, so being a child neglecter is a violation of his probation! He’s screwed no matter what he does!

Anywho, John should seek a ex parte TRO prohibiting the school district from filing child neglect charges against him. Why that one? Because the court is more likely to view meeting the conditions of his probation as more important.

12

The IRS put me in that position. An IRS employee stole the FICA taxes I was responsible for and paid. They came after me for that money, demanding I pay that before paying my personal income taxes. I couldn’t afford both and got stuck with the fines and interest. Their actions were illegal, they knew I did not owe the FICA taxes, I had documentation to prove it, but I did not have enough money to pay and fight it at the same time.

I’ll note that one IRS employee in the end helped me get the matter ended while others were attempting to screw me even further. But I won’t ever recover the taxes, interests, fines that I never should have been forced to pay.

13

Other examples within the scope of my question but not involving being required to be in two places at one time:

  1. John is in possession of information that is legally confidential under a specific Maryland statute, with a criminal penalty for willful disclosure except in accordance with Maryland law. A New York judge issues a subpoena demanding that John disclose it. (or, for the bold, a judge in Quebec issues the order).

  2. Mary filed a restraining order against John in the state of Tennessee. The order prohibits John from willfully contacting Mary or sending her anything. A judge in Kentucky orders John to pay $1000 to Mary.

  3. John is a dual citizen of the US and Mexico. He is serving in the Mexican Army. He is given an order (lawful under Mexican law) to serve overseas in Cuba in such a way as to constitute a violation of the US Helms-Burton Act. So, if he obeys the order, he violates US law. If he disobeys the order, he violates Mexican law.

14

Seriously, I’m like a masochist with this thread. Last one, and then I’m done. There must still be law students on this board; this is their bread and butter!

First scenario:
Some of this sort of depends on who the parties are. For convenience, I’m going to assume that all relevant parties are subject to the jurisdiction of all courts mentioned. John immediately files an ex parte application for a restraining order in Maryland to preclude the disclosure, which, if successful, would forbid the other party from seeking the privileged information. (I presume you mean privileged rather than confidential, BTW.) Simultaneously, in New York or Quebec, John files an ex parte application for an order staying the court’s disclosure order and shortening time on a choice of law motion.

John’s choice of law motion would apply the choice of law standard to get the New York/Quebec court to apply Maryland law to the disclosure, so that it remains privileged. If the motion is denied, he’d file emergency appeals all the way up the chain. If those were all denied, he’d be up a creek. Probably would have to take the order back to Maryland to get permission to violate the law.

Second scenario:
John sends the money to Mary’s attorney. Or, if none, John files a motion with the Kentucky court seeking “clarification” of the court’s order. If the court orders him to send the money anyway, John then goes to the Tennessee court that issued the restraining order, and asks it to enforce the Kentucky order insofar as John must send Mary the money. (The reality is that if John has to send Mary money in Kentucky, she’s a party to the lawsuit too, so subject to the Kentucky court’s jurisdiction, so the court would tell her that she’s not allowed to complain that receiving the money is a violation of the Tennessee order, subject to being penalized by the Kentucky court.)

Third scenario:
Don’t know. That’s army law. But, again, presumably Mexican military law has a provision for appealing orders. That’s the route he goes.

15

I’ll also point out that in reality, violating a legal obligation doesn’t automagically transport you to jail. Some human prosecutor type has to charge you or write you a ticket or whatever; even for automatic traffic cameras, you can opt to have a judge listen to your explanation. And prosecutors always have the option of not charging you, if you can make a decent case that you really didn’t have any choice but to break the law, and did so in a way that tried to follow the spirit of the law and didn’t hurt anyone, etc.

16

I thought of that, and mentioned it in my OP. I was more interested in the theory behind it rather than what, practically, would happen in real life.

Have there ever been any actual cases where a person was under two competing legal obligations (do X and also refrain from doing X, or do X and do Y where X and Y cannot both be done) and they selected one (either based on specific legal advice, common sense about which one was more serious, or just personal preference), and were prosecuted for violating the other one, and they attempted to raise a defense of impossibility?

17

I believe you are talking about a Defense of Necessity: Necessity (tort) - Wikipedia, or possibly Competing Harms, Competing harms - Wikipedia.

18

Nope- they’ve thought of that. He must request a transfer of his probation from NJ to PA http://http://www.interstatecompact.org/Legal/RulesStepbyStep/Chapter3/Rule31011.aspx. Unlike other transfer requests, PA has no discretion

19

I thought of one to add.
You end up taking a wrong turn and getting lost. As a result you’re out later than you thought. As you head down the super highway you notice two things. You’re really getting drowsy, and you can’t legally pull over unless it’s an emergency.
It’s a crime to drive while impaired (by drowsiness in this case), however until you find an off ramp or a rest stop or same place legal to park you can’t stop driving. What is your obligation? Would “I’m tired” count as emergency enough to pull over?