FEDERAL CIVIL PROCEDURE Flashcards
What’s the Civ Pro issue checklist?
1. Right court?
• personal jx
• subject matter jx
• venue
2. Leanring about the case (pre-trial)
• service of process
• pleadings
• discovery
3. Complex cases
• joinder, etc.
4. Adjudication
• pretrial
• conferences
• trial
5. Appellate review
6. Preclusion
•claim & issue preclusionPersonal jurisdiction is the court’s power over the _______ whereas subject matter jurisdiction is the court’s power over the ________.
parties; case
Personal jurisdiction concerns one question:
Can the P sue in this state. Not concerned with what court within that state–that’s subject matter jx.
2 step analysis to determine whether there is personal jurisdiction:
- satisfy a statute (state long arm statute) AND
2. satisfy the Constitution (due process)
Is the analysis for personal jurisdcition different depending on whether the case will be filed in federal or state court?
No. Same in both.
Most states have a series of statutes that allow p.j. in different situations, for example, served process in the state, domiciled in the state, conduct business in the state, etc.
*CA statute reaches teh constituional limit. So just mention long-arm and do constitutional test.
The constitutional analysis for personal jurisdiction asks what question?
Whether the defendant has such minimum contacts with the forum so that exercise of jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice?
The easy or traditional cases that are almost guaranteed to meet the constitutional test for personal jurisdiction are:
- D is domiciled in the forum
- D consents
- D served process in teh forum (not trkced)
Where the contact between the D and forum state (for PJ) is not clear, what are the three headings to consider?
- Contact
- Relatedness
- Fairness
In PJ C analysis what is contact and what factors are considered?
There must be relevant contract between D and the forum state.
- The contact must result from purposeful availment.
• D’s purposeful/ voluntary act
• D must reach out to the forum
• Consider whether D benefited from roads,
etc. while there. - Foreseeability
• It must be foreseeable that D could get sued
in this forum.
In PJ C analysis what is relatedness and what factors are considered?
For relatedness we ask whether the P’s claim arose from D’s contact with the forum.
If yes: specific personal jurisdiction: even if the D does not have a great deal of contract w/ CA, might still uphold jx.
If no: JX is ok only if the court has general personal jx. To have general personal jx, the D must essentially be at home in the forum.
• person = domiciled
• corporation= where formed, or where it has its primary place of business. (just sales/ purchases are not enough)
A D who is essentially at home in the forum can be sued there for a claim that arose anywhere in the world; that is ______________. But a D who is not essentially at home in teh forum can only be sued there for a claim arising from those activities; that is ____________.
general personal jurisdiction; specific personal jurisdiction
In PJ C analysis what is fairness and what factors are considered?
Whether jurisdiction in the forum would be fair or reasonable under the circumstances. Consider:
- Convenience: forum is OK unless it puts D at a severe disadvantage in the litigation. Tough standard. Look for:
• where the witnesses are
• far from D’s home?
• tough to get evidence there? - State’s interest to provide a forum for its citizens.
- Plaintiff’s interest to sue at home if injured, e.g.
Recap of C analysis for PJ:
If doesn’t meet traditional situations that pass, then evaluate:
1. Contacts
• Purposeful availment
• foreseeability
2. RElatedness
• specific pj
• general pj
3. Fairness
• Convenience: D at severe disadvantage?
• state's interest
• plaintiff's interest
An interactive website can be ______ ________ for PJ purposes.
purposeful availment
Federal courts can hear only certain types of suits. What are the two main types?
diversity of citizenship and federal question
For diversity of citizenship cases, there are 2 requirements:
- the case is either
• between citizens of different states, OR
• between a citizen of a state & a citizen of a
foreign country (alienage) AND - the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000
What is the complete diversity rule for diversity jx?
no diversity if any P is a citizen of the same state as any D.
How do you determine the citizenship of a natural person who is a US citizen?
citizenship is the state of her domicile.
Domicile=
- presence in state, AND
- intent to make it her permanent home
How do you determine a natural person’s (US citizen) domicile?
- presence in state, AND
2. intent to make it her permanent home
Can a person have more than one domicile at a time?
Nope. Only a citizen of one state.
*Corporation can be a citizen of multiple states.
At what point in time is a party’s domicile determined?
At the time the case is filed. If move afterwards, won’t destroy diversity.
For a corporation, citizenship =
- state where incorporated AND
2. the one state where the corporation has its principal place of business.
EXY Corp (inc. in AZ and PPB in CA) sues D (CA). Is there diversity?
Nope. Corporation is a citizen of 2 states here: both AZ and CA.
What is the corporation’s principal place of business?
Where the managers direct, control, and coordinate corporate business. “nerve center” HQ
How do you determine citizenship for an unincorporated business? (LLC, Pship, etc)
Use the citizenship of all members (includes general and limited partners). Dont’ care about where formed or PPB.
A partnership has partners who are citizens of CA, AZ, UT, and NV. What is the pship’s citizneship?
all 4 states.
How do you determine citizenship for decedents, minors, or incompetents?
Use their citizenship, not the citizneship of their representative.
An executor (CA), on behalf of the estate of Elvis (TN), sues D (CA). Is that ok?
Yes, because Elvis (TN) has diversity from D (CA). Executor’s citizenship doesn’t matter.
What is the rule for amount in controversy?
P’s good faith claim must exceed $75,000. (not counting interest on the claim or costs of litigation).
Exceed! Not exactly $75,000.
P sues for exactly $75,000. Ok for diversity jx?
Nope. Must exceed $75,000.
Suppose P sues for more than $75,000 but ultimately wins less than $75,000. Is diversity jx ok?
Yes. What P actually wins is irrelevant to jx. Whatever P claims in good faith is OK unless it is clear to a legal certainty that she cannot recover more than $75,000. Rare.
What is aggregation for purposes of diversity jx?
Aggregation means adding 2 or more claims to mee the amount in controversy requirement.
What are the aggregation rules for diveristy jx?
- Can aggregate claims of 1 P v. 1 D.
P sues D for breach of contract $40,000 and for $50,000 for a totally unrelated claim. Can aggregate and meet requirement with $90,000. - Cannot aggregate if two claims but not 1 P and 1D.
P1 sues D for $50,000. In the same case P2 sues D for $40,000. Cannot aggregate. - Can aggregate for joint tortfeasors.
So P sues X, Y, and Z for a total of $75,001. Totally ok.
How do you determine the amount in controversy if the P is seeking equitable relief?
There are 2 tests. If either is met, most courts say ok. *Use both on the exam
P sues D for an unjunction to tear down part of his house that blocks P’s view.
- P’s viewpoint: does the blocked view decrease the value of P’s property by more than $75,000?
- D’s viewpoint: would it cost D more than $75,000 to comply with the injunction?
Even if diversity requirements are met, federal courts will never hear actions involving (4)
- issuance of divorce
- alimony
- child custody decree
- probate an estate
For federal question cases,
the claim must arise under federal law.
Is the P enforcing a federal right?
Sharon Stone hires DE to build a house. DE fails to build, but argues that federal environmental statute prhibits building where Sharon want to build. Sharon sues DE for specific performance and alleges that the federal statute does not apply. Is there FQ jx?
No. Sharon is not enforcing a federal right. DE is using the federal law as a defense basically. For FQ, the claim must arise under federal law.
Diversity and FQ can get a ______ into federal court. Once it is there, though, there may be additional ____ in that case. For _________, test whether it meets ______ or ________. If so, it can come in. If not, see ________ jx.
case; claims; every single calim, diversity; FQ; supplemental
What is supplemental jurisdiction?
SJ only works after a case is already in federal court (through diversity or FQ). Now there is an additional claim that does not meet FQ or diversity. SJ might allow that claim to come in anyway.
What is the test for supplemental jurisdiction?
The claim we want to get into federal court must share a “common nucleus of operative fact.” with the claim that invoked federal smj.
- This test is always met by claims that arise from the same transaction or occurrence as the underlying claim.
- Limitation= In a diversity case, P cannot use supplemental jx. to overcome a lack of diversity.
What is the very important limitation to supplemental jurisdiction?
In a diversity
P (Utah) sues D-1 (CA) and D-2 (Utah) on state-law claims in one case. The claims arise from the same transaction. The claims exceed $75,000. The claim by P against D-1 meets diversity of citizenship jurisdiction. The claim by P against D-2 does not. Can the claim by P against D-2 invoke supplemental jurisdiction?
No because P can never overcome a lack of diversity in a diversity case.
P (CA) sues D (CA) for (1) violation of federal antitrust laws, and joins a transactionally related claim for (2) violation of state antitrust laws. OK? Claim (1) is OK because it!s a FQ. But claim (2) is not FQ (because it!s based on state law) and does not meet diversity. Can claim (2) invoke supplemental jx?
Yes, because the limitation does not apply to a FQ case. FQ got the main claim into federal court, then want to join a state claim. Basis is FQ.
P-1 (CA) and P-2 (CA) sue D (AZ) on state-law claims. P-1’s claim is for $100,000. P-2’s claim arises from the same transaction, and is for $50,000. P-1’s claim meets diversity. But P-2’s claim does not, because even though citizenship is OK, the claim does not exceed $75,000. Can the claim by P-2 invoke supplemental jurisdiction?
Yes, because you can use supplemental jurisdiction to overcome an amount in controversy problem in a diversity case.
Give the solid gold review for supplemental jurisdiction:
A non-federal, non-diversity claim can be heard in federal court if it shares a common nucleus of operative fact with the claim that invoked F SMJ. (T/O always works) UNLESS
- asserted by a plaintiff
- in a diversity of citizenship case AND
- is against a citizen of the same state as the P.
For supplemental jurisdiction, the court retains discretion to not hear the supplemental claim if:
- the federal question is dismissed early in the proceeding.
- the state law claim is complex
- state law issues would predominate.
What is removal?
A D sued in state court might be able to remove the case to federal court. Removal is a one-way street it transfers a case ONLY from a state trial court to a federal trial court. If removal was improper, the federal court can remand the case to state court.
When does a D need to remove?
Within 30 days of service.
*Get a new 30 days if D2 gets served later.
Who can remove?
The defendant must remove, never the P, even if D files claim against P in the same case.
If 2 D’s, all Ds who have been served with process must be joined and must be a unanimous decision to remove.
P sues D-1 and D-2 on June 1. D-1 is served with process on June 1. She does not remove within 30 days. D-2 is served with process on August 1. Can she and D-1 now remove?
Yes. You get a fresh 30 days after D2 is served.
What kind of case can be removed?
Give general rule and 2 exceptions.
Generally, any case that would meet the requirements for diversity of citizenship or federal question.
Exceptions: (only in diversity cases)
- No removal if D is a citizen of the forum AND
- No removal more than 1 year after the case was filed in state court
P (Georgia) sues D-1 (NY) and D-2 (Alabama) in an Alabama state court for $500,000. Can D-1 and D-2 remove?
No, because D-2 is an in state defendant. If any D is in-state, no removal.
If a D removes, what federal court does the case go to?
ONly to the federal district embracing teh state court.
What is the procedure for removal?
- D files notice of removal in federal court, stating grounds of removal
- signed under Rule 11
- attach all docs served on D in state action;
- copy to all adverse parties
- file copy of notice in state court
If removal was procedurally improper, P moves to remand to state court; she must do so within _____ days of removal. But if there is no federal smj, P can move to remand _____. In other words, there is no time limit on raising lack of __________.
30; anytime; subject matter jx.
D who files a ______ counterclaim in state court probably waives the right to remove. Filing a ______ counterclaim there probably does not waive the right to remove.
permissive; compulsory
What is the Erie doctrine?
In a diversity case, the federal court must decide which law to apply (state or federal). In diversity cases, the federal court must apply state substantive law.
What are some examples of clearly substantive issues?
- elements of a claim/ defense
- statute of limitations
- rules for tolling statutes of limitations
- conflict (or choice) of law rules.
What are the 3 tests that can be used to determine whether a federal judge can ignore state law in a diversity (Erie) case?
- Outcome determinative: would applying or ignoring the state rule affect outcome of the case? If so, probably substantive, should use state law.
- Balance of interest: does either federal or state system have a strong interest in having its rule applied?
- Avoid forum shopping: if the federal court ignores state law on this issue, will it cause parties to flock to federal court? If os, use state law.
What is the basic idea of venue?
SMJ told us we can take a case to federal court. Venue tells us exactly which federal court.
P may lay venue in any district where:
- all defendants reside
- Special rule about diff. districts/same state
- a substantial part of the claim arose.
What is the special rule in regards to venue?
Generally P may lay venue in the district where all defendants reside, but in cases where all Ds reside in different districts of the same state, P can lay venue in the district in which either/ any of them resides.
E.g. Wayne Newton (D. Nev.) sues D-1 (N.D. Ca.) and D-2 (C.D. Ca.). SPECIAL RULE in cases where all defendants reside in different districts of the same state, plaintiff can lay venue in the district in which any of them resides. So here P could sue both Ds in N.D. Ca. OR C.D. Ca.
Where do Ds reside for venue purposes?
- human: in district where domiciled
2. businesss: in all districts where subject to personal jurisdiction
A federal district court may ___ the case to another federal distrct court. It can only transfer to a district wherer the case _______, meaning to a ______ venue that has _______ over the D.
transfer; could have been filed; proper; personal jurisdiction
If venue in original district is proper, that court has ______ to transfer to another district, based on ____________ and the ____________.
discretion; convenience for the parties & witnesses; the interests of justice
In deciding whether to transfer venue where it has discretion to do so, the court will look at what factors?
Public & private factors showing that the other court is teh center of gravity
Public: things like what law applies, what community shoudl be burdened with jury service, keeping local controversy in the local court
Private: convenience–where are the witnesses & evidence.
*Transferee court applies the choice of law rules of the original court.
If venue in original district is improper, court
may transfer in the interests of justice or dismiss.
Like transfer, there is another court that is far more sensible than the present one. But for _________, the court does not transfer to that court it, _____________. Why?
forum non conveniens; dismisses or stays the case
Because transfer is impossible–the more convenient court is in a different judicial system (e.g. a foreign country)
The decision in a forum non conveniens case is almost never granted if ________.
P is a resident of the present forum.
For a forum non conveniens dismissal or stay, the other court must be ________. P’s recovery in most foreign courts will not be as large as in American courts. Does that matter?
Adequate
Not determinative. All we care about is that P gets a fair day in court. Doesn’t guarantee that P gets the same remedy she would have gotten here.
