Civ Pro II Final Exam Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What are pleadings?

A
filings submitted by the parties to present their case, principally their claims/defenses, to the court. 
Rule 7(a): Pleading Generally Allowed: Defines pleadings to include the complaint, the answer, and some other initial papers in a lawsuit.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Complaint definition

A

series of factual & legal allegations related to a claim to give the Defendant notice & tell the court – need to specifically set out fact that formed the dispute:
• Sufficient factual allegations
• Cognizable Legal Theory: based on the factual allegations, would entitle the Plaintiff to a legal remedy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Options for responding to a claim

A

Pre-answer motion OR Answer to complaint

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Notice pleadings burden

A

Plaintiff has the burden of pleading in their complaint.
-Whoever bears the Burden of pleading bears the burden of producing evidence of that claim or that defense. If you can provide enough evidence to move forward to trial, you have burden of persuasion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Notice pleadings definition and requirements

A

Requires a short plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief – this is the standard in determining the sufficiency of a complaint.

  1. 8(a)(1): Short/plain statement of the court’s jurisdiction
  2. 8(a)(2): Short/plain statement of the claim showing the pleader is entitled to relief
  3. 8(a)(3): A demand for judgment for relief sought (prayer for relief)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Twiqbal Standard

A

Requires pleading with enough facts to state a claim for relief that is plausible on the face of the complaint.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Twiqbal two part test

A

o 1- Disregard conclusory allegations

o 2- Determine whether remaining factual allegations plausibly support P’s entitlement to a remedy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

In alleging fraud or mistake…

A

…a party must state with PARTICULARITY the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake.

–Malice, intent, knowledge, and
other conditions of a person’s mind may be alleged generally.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

In pleading conditions precedent…

A

…it suffices to allege GENERALLY that all conditions precedent have occurred or been performed. But when DENYING that a condition precedent has occurred or been performed, a party must do so with PARTICULARITY.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

When claiming special damages…

A

..need to plead with particularity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Pre Answer Motions general definition

A
  • Before filing the answer, the party may make one or more pre-answer motions challenging specific issues.
  • If D makes no motion or if the motion is denied, then D must file an answer.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Lack of SMJ

A

Can be raised at ANY time either by the court or by the defendant.
-if granted, P can refile in state ct (dismissed w/out prejudice)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Lack of PJ

A

Must raise in first filing or waive.

-if granted, P can refile in same state (dismissed w/out prejudice)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Improper venue

A

raise or waive

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

insufficient process

A

raise or waive

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

insufficient service of process

A

raise or waive

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

(12(b)(6) failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted

A

Not waivable
Rule 12(h)(2):
-can raise later in pleadings listed in Rule 7(a),
-in a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c)
-or at trial (assumes all facts are true)

-if granted, operates as judgment on merits disposing of claim. Can’t refile

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

In granting a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim:

A

a court is deciding that even if every factual allegation in the plaintiff’s complaint is true, the plaintiff is still not entitled to relief. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Failure to join a party under rule 19

A

Not waivable

  • can raise later in pleadings listed in Rule 7(a),
  • in a motion for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c)
  • or at trial (assumes all facts are true)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Must all defenses be filed in pre answer?

A
  • No, but IF D makes such motion, he MUST include all the motions he plans on filing or waive them.
  • D may file these defenses with his answer if he doesn’t file a pre-motion, BUT D will have to respond to the substantive allegations of the complaint under 8(b) & assert affirmative defenses under 8(c) and assert counter-claim under 13.
  • IF D moves to dismiss, he may temporarily avoid answering.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

After pre answer is filed and denied, when must an answer be due?

A

In 14 days

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

12(f) Motion to Strike

A

-forces removal of irrelevant and prejudicial allegations in a pleading

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Two ways to strike

A

a. Substantively: Strike allegations that are substantively unwarranted.
b. When allegations are unduly prejudicial: strike allegations that are redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Post answer motion 12(c): Motion for judgment on the pleadings

A

• Any time after pleadings are closed, but early enough not to delay trial, a party may move for judgment on the pleadings
May be made:
-on the basis that no answer has been filed,
-or that the pleadings disclose that there are (1) no material issues of fact to be resolved and (2) that party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Answers generally

A

–If pre answer motion to dismiss is filed and fails, D must file Answer to answer to substantive allegations in complaint
–Answers can either be constituting denials or affirmative defenses.
• Time limits: D has 21 days to serve an answer after being served with the complaint, unless filing a pre-answer motion, which alters the time limits.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Denials- Rule 8

A
  • Rule 8(b) requires Δ to deny only allegations Δ actually disputes
  • Rule 8(b)(3) - general denials (I deny every allegation)
  • Rule 8(b)(4) - can deny part of an allegation (but you admit the rest)
  • Rule 8(b)(5) - “I don’t know” = treated as denial
  • Rule 8(b)(6) - any allegation not denied is deemed admitted
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

NONEXHAUSTIVE list of affirmative defenses in Rule 8(c)

A

(1) In General. In responding to a pleading, a party must affirmatively state any avoidance or affirmative defenses:
- Defenses are not limited to the list (non exhaustive)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Rule 15 Amended pleadings: Amendments before trial as a matter of course

A

(1) A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within:
o 21 days after serving the (original) pleading OR
o • If the pleading is one to which responsive pleading is required, then
21d after service of
• a responsive pleading or
• a 12(b), (e), or (f) motion,
whichever is earlier

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Rule 15 Amended pleadings: Other Amendments before trial

A

(2) Other amendments are allowed “only with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave. The court should freely give leave when justice so requires.”
o Reasons to deny amendment
 undue delay
 bad faith or dilatory(delay) motive (by movant)
 repeated failure to cure deficiencies (given leave already)
 futility of the amendment (wouldn’t make difference)
 prejudice to opposing party
• Prejudice must be shown.
● burden on party opposing amendment to show prejudice
● court determines prejudice on particular facts of the case

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Time to respond to amended pleading

A

Rule 15(3) Time to Respond. Unless the court orders otherwise, any required response to an amended pleading must be made

  • within the time remaining to respond to the original pleading or
  • within 14 days after service of the amended pleading, whichever is later.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Amending pleadings during and after trial

A
  • (1) Based on an Objection at Trial. If, at trial, a party objects that evidence is not within the issues raised in the pleadings, the court may permit the pleadings to be amended. The court should freely permit an amendment when doing so will aid in presenting the merits and the objecting party fails to satisfy the court that the evidence would prejudice that party’s action or defense on the merits.
  • (2) For Issues Tried by Consent. When an issue not raised by the pleadings is tried by the parties’ express or implied consent, it must be treated in all respects as if raised in the pleadings
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

15(c) Relation back of amendments test

A

(1) An amendment to a pleading relates back to the date of the original pleading when:
o (B) the amendment asserts a claim or defense that arose out of the same conduct, transaction, or occurrence set out—or attempted to be set out—in the original pleading; or
 logical relation Test to argue whether claims are related: Are these claims logically related? DO SAME + DIFFERENT ANALYSES on one hand these are the same, on the other hand these are different

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Relation back issue spot

A

original complaint was filed within SoL but amended complaint is barred because SoL has expired.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

Relation back arguments

A
  • Non-movant will argue that adding the claim to the complaint is barred by SoL. Furthermore, the original complaint should have a narrow scope & the amendment is a separate claim.
  • Movant will argue that the new claim relates back to the original complaint. Reasoning that non-movant had sufficient notice in the original complaint. Furthermore, amendment is related back to the STO of the original complaint and has a broad scope that includes this new addition: Same events, not separate.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Joinder of claims

A

Rule 18(a): A party asserting a claim, counterclaim, crossclaim, or third-party claim may join, as independent or alternative claims, as many claims as it has against an opposing party.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

Consolidation and separate trials

A

. If actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may:
o (1) join for hearing or trial any or all matters at issue in the actions;
o (2) consolidate the actions; or
o (3) issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay.

Separate Trials. For convenience, to avoid prejudice, or to expedite and economize, the court may order a separate trial of one or more separate issues,

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

Consolidation

A

. If actions before the court involve a common question of law or fact, the court may:
o (1) join for hearing or trial any or all matters at issue in the actions;
o (2) consolidate the actions; or
o (3) issue any other orders to avoid unnecessary cost or delay.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

Separate trials

A

For convenience, to avoid prejudice, or to expedite and economize, the court may order a separate trial of one or more separate issues,

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

Compulsory counterclaims

A

A pleading must state as a counterclaim any claim that—at the time of its service—the pleader has against an opposing party if the claim:
I1-(A) arises out of the same transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim; and
I2-(B) does not require adding another party over whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction. (No PJ)
I3-Had the claim at the time of service?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

Compulsory counterclaims: (1) same transaction or occurrence test

A

LOGICAL RELATION TEST: Is there any logical relation between the claim and the counterclaim? (Plant v. Blazer)
 This is a LOOSE standard which permits a BROAD interpretation. The hallmark of this approach is its FLEXIBILITY.
USE SAME DIFFERENT ANALYSIS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

Compulsory counterclaim JDX

A

There will always be 1367 supplemental jdx over compulsory counterclaims because they arise out of the same transaction pro occurrence as the opposing party’s original claim with original JDX

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

Permissive counterclaim generally

A

A pleading may state as a counterclaim . . . any claim that is not compulsory.

43
Q

Permissive counterclaim JDX

A

JDX requirement: permissive counterclaims do not arise under the same transaction or
occurrence, so the court will need to have an independent jurisdictional basis for any
permissive counterclaims under 1331 or 1332.
• A federal court has jurisdiction over a permissive state law counterclaim if the claim is so related to a federal claim that it forms part of the same case or controversy.
• Is same body of evidence required to prove claims? Y= goes to supp. Jdx

44
Q

Third party claims: Cross claims

A

A pleading may state as a crossclaim any claim by one party against a coparty if:
• the claim arises out of the same transaction or occurrence that is the
subject matter of the original action or of a counterclaim, or
• the claim relates to any property that is the subject matter of the original action.

45
Q

Third party practice: Impleader

A
  • Two elements: Derivative liability AND right of recovery under the substantive law (indemnity)
  • Derivative liability from same claim = always supplemental JDX if not 1331 or 1332
  • Rule 14(a): If there is another party liable to the defendant for defendants’ liability to plaintiff, then the defendant can bring in that party as a 3rd party defendant.
  • Rule 14(b): Where a plaintiff can bring a 3rd party. Occurs when another defendant is liable. Just need a substantive basis (indemnity or contribution)
46
Q

Permissive joinder of parties: Plaintiffs

A

Persons may join in one action as plaintiffs if:(A) they assert any right to relief jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences; and
transaction or occurrence. (mosley)
(B) any question of law or fact common to all plaintiffs will arise in the action.
• Finding commonality has received a permissive application so that common questions have been found to exist in a wide range of contexts. (mosley)

47
Q

Permissive joinder of defendants

A

Persons—as well as a vessel, cargo, or other property subject to admiralty process in rem—may be joined in one action as defendants if:
 (A) any right to relief is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences; and
 (B) any question of law or fact common to all defendants will arise in the action.

48
Q

Is misjoinder a ground for dismissal?

A

NO. Misjoinder of parties is not a ground for dismissing an action. On motion or on its own, the court may at any time, on just terms, add or drop a party. The court may also sever any claim against a party.

49
Q

Compulsory joinder trigger

A

defendant makes a 12(b)(7) motion to dismiss for failure to join a party under Rule 19

50
Q

Required joinder of parties (rule 19) steps

A
  1. Is the absent party a necessary party? (19(a)(1))
    a. There is some connection of property ownership, contract rights, or obligations between those who are initially made parties and those who have not been joined
    b. What is the importance of the absent party to the claim that is being litigated in the case?
    c. Without the absent party, complete relief cannot be accorded to the parties =necessary party
  2. If yes necessary, is joinder of the absent party feasible?
  3. If yes feasible, is the absent party an indispensable party? (19(b))
51
Q

Factors to determine an indispensable party under compulsory joinder

A

c. Factors to determine an indispensable party:
i. whether a judgment rendered in person’s absence would be prejudicial to him;
ii. the extent to which the prejudice can be avoided;
iii. whether a judgment rendered in the person’s absence would be adequate
iv. whether the plaintiff will have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for non-joinder

52
Q

Are joint tortfeasors necessary parties?

A

NO. Joint tortfeasors are not required parties. (Temple v. Synthes Corp)

53
Q

Intervention of right must:

A
  1. be timely–the intervenor may not lie in wait until the litigation is on the brink of resolution.
  2. The intervenor must have an interest in the property or transaction at issue
  3. Movant must be so situated that disposing of the action without movant may impair or impede movant’s ability to protect that interest
  4. Exception: an applicant meeting all these criteria will be denied intervention if those already in the lawsuit are adequately representing the interest
54
Q

Permissive intervention

A

In General. On timely motion, the court may permit anyone to intervene who:
 (A) is given a conditional right to intervene by a federal statute; or
 (B) has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common question of law or fact.

55
Q

Martin v. Wilks rules for intervention/joinder

A

o A judgment or decree is only binding on the parties to a lawsuit and has no impact on the rights of a non-party who was not joined, even if the non-party had an opportunity to intervene.

56
Q

Default judgment

A
  • A default judgment allows plaintiff to recover money or injunction requested.
  • A default judgment is available if (1) ∆ made no response at all; (2) the claim is for a sum certain (amount of damages is certain); (3) п gets an affidavit of the sum owed; and (4) ∆ is not a minor or incompetent.
57
Q

Involuntary dismissal with prejudice

A

Trigger:
• The D wins the case in involuntary dismissal
• Think of all rule 12 motions = involuntary
• Situation where P’s conduct is so bad, that court decides to involuntarily dismiss P’s case

58
Q

Voluntary dismissal without prejudice

A

The plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing:
 A notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or MSJ; or
 A stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared
• Counterclaims: if D has counter-claims, those counter-claims move forward even if P has voluntarily dismissed

59
Q

Settlements

A
  • Release claims and future claims.
  • Control risk
  • Confidentiality provisions
60
Q

Federal arbitration act

A

o The Federal Arbitration Act requires arbitration agreements to be enforced according to their terms unless an agreement may be invalidated by generally applicable contract defenses.

61
Q

Motion for summary judgment generally

A

Raised after discovery, but before trial
• Moving party must show that (1) there is “no genuine dispute as to an issue of material fact” and (2) she is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
• Movant (usually Δ, though could be ∏) wins if Movant shows that the evidence compiled so far means Movant would win at trial as a matter of law, unless the other party:
1 - shows insufficient time to gather evidence
2 - produces its own evidence [per Rule 56(e)] contradicting Movant’s, or
3 - otherwise shows a rational jury could find for it at trial

62
Q

Elements for Motion for SJ

A

1) No genuine dispute of material fact, and
- The court will consider the following when analyzing GDMF
1. Fruits of discovery and/or
2. Affidavits
2) Moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law

63
Q

Celotex rule for Motion for SJ

A

b. Movant can meet its burden for motion for summary judgment by showing that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party’s case.
c. Movant DOES NOT have to produce evidence showing there’s no genuine issue of material fact when it is an issue on which the other party bears the burden of proof

64
Q

Bias burden shifting rule for Motion for SJ

A

a. The initial burden is on the movant to make a prima facie showing as to the absence of evidence to support the non-movant’s case.
- -Once the movant has met its initial burden, the burden shifts to the non-moving party. The non-moving party then must come forward with specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. Rule 56(e)

65
Q

Tolan v. Cotton Motion for SJ rule

A

a. Summary judgment may only be granted when the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the non-movant, establishes that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

66
Q

Motion for SJ Affidavit

A

Per Rule 56(c), the party asserting that a fact cannot be genuinely disputed (the movant) and the party asserting that a fact is genuinely disputed (the non-moving party) must support the assertion by citing to particular parts of materials in the record (i.e., depositions, documents, electronically stored information, affidavits)
• Additionally, the non-moving party can object to summary judgment under Rule 56(d) by submitting affidavits or declarations stating there was inadequate time for discovery.

67
Q

To successfully oppose a motion for summary judgment,

A

a nonmovant must show a genuine dispute regarding a material fact that requires a jury’s resolution. A nonmovant must point to specific evidence beyond the pleadings to create a factual dispute.
All the nonmovant need do is submit enough evidence to support a minimally reasonable inference in its favor.

68
Q

Three burdens

A

Burden of pleading
Burden of production
Burden of persuasion

69
Q

Burden of pleading

A

a. Who has the burden of the complaint? Parties making claims have the burden of pleading his or her claim
b. If defendant pleads affirmative defense, then has burden of proving such defense. If it doesn’t, then runs risk of waiving

70
Q

Burden of production

A

a. P has burden of establishing his or her claim in complaint (if don’t, expect D to file 12(b)(6) to have dismissed for failure to state a claim)

71
Q

Burden of persuasion

A

a. Indicates beyond what level must the trier of fact be convinced
b. In crim law- Beyond reasonable doubt
c. In civil cases - preponderance of evidence

72
Q

Partial summary judgment

A

Summary judgment for one element of a claim or part of a defense

73
Q

Recusal of judges

A

Preemptory challenges of judges

For cause recusal

74
Q

Peremptory challenges of judges

A

 About a third of the states, mostly midwestern and western, permit peremptory challenges of judges. A party wishing to make such a challenge simply files a timely affidavit alleging in conclusory terms that the judge is prejudiced against the party.
 Actual prejudice need not be shown, but each side gets only one such challenge.

75
Q

For cause recusal

A

 What cause might look like is defined in 28 U.S.C. §455. Two broad categories for disqualifying a judge:
• One contains specific guidelines barring, for example, a judge’s hearing a case “where he has served as lawyer in the matter in controversy” before becoming a judge or “[w]here he has served in governmental employment and. . . . expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case or controversy.”
• It also bars decisions in cases in which a judge or her family has a financial interest. 28 U.S.C. §455(b)

76
Q

Recusal cases

A

o Caperton v. AT Massey Coal Co
 A judge is biased and should recuse himself when a contributor’s influence on his election is so substantial that it would offer a possible temptation to the average judge to lead him not to be impartial.
o Williams v. Pennsylvania
 Because Justice Castille had a “significant, personal involvement” in the underlying case, due process compelled him to recuse himself.

77
Q

Right to trial by jury

A

• Under the Seventh Amendment, in suits at common law, where the value in
controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be
preserved.
• a party may demand a jury trial by serving the other parties with a written demand - which may be included in a pleading - no later than 14 days after the last pleading directed to the issue is served, and filing the demand in accordance with Rule 5(d).
a. Rule 38
1. (d) Waiver; Withdrawal. A party waives a jury trial unless its demand is properly served and filed. A proper demand may be withdrawn only if the parties consent.

78
Q

Test for what claims can be heard by jury in state court

A

• Historical test: To determine whether a party is entitled to a trial by jury under the Seventh Amendment, courts apply the historical test, which looks to whether the
individual’s claim falls within the jurisdiction of the courts of law in 1791.

79
Q

Equity claims can be heard by jury?

A

a. Equity claims-NO

1. No jury trial in 1791, no jury trial at present day

80
Q

Damages claims can be heard by jury?

A

b. Damages claims-YES

1. Claims for damages under common law received jury trials

81
Q

If unsure whether claim could be heard by jury in at common law…

A

c. If unsure, analogize
1. Under the historical test, courts seek to give parties the same right of jury trial as they had in 1791.
2. Q: whether a given claim and remedy lay within the jurisdiction of the common law courts in 1791, and thus receives jury trial

82
Q

Jury selection

A

• During voir dire, each side gets unlimited strikes for cause (e.g., bias, prejudice, related to party) and 3 peremptory challenges (which must be used in a race- and gender-neutral way because jury selection is state action).

83
Q

For cause jury challenges

A
  1. The district court must grant a challenge for cause if a prospective juror shows actual prejudice or bias.
  2. Actual bias can be shown either by
    a. the juror’s own admission of bias or
    b. “by proof of specific facts which show the juror has such a close connection to the facts at trial that bias is presumed.” (getter v. Walmart)
  3. Courts have presumed bias in extraordinary situations where a prospective juror has had a direct financial interest in the trial’s outcome. (Getter v. Wal-mart)
  4. Unlimited number of for cause challenges
84
Q

Preemptory jury challenges

A
  1. for no reason, parties need not justify in any way
  2. Fed: In civil cases in federal court (where the Rules provide that juries consist of 6 to 12 people), parties are entitled to three peremptory challenges. 28 U.S.C. §1870.
  3. Systematic striking of jurors based on race or gender without a justification based on nonracial or nongender factors violates the defendant’s and jurors’ rights to equal protection and harms the community at large. Not allowed.
85
Q

Motion for judgment as a matter of law

A

Post trial motion.
• Granted if the evidence is such that reasonable jury could not find for the opposing party.
• Evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party.
• Timing: MJMOL is brought at the close of all evidence prior to submission to jury After plaintiff has rested but before case submitted to jury
∆ usually has a chance to move twice (at the close of п’s evidence and at the close of all evidence) but п has a chance to move only once (at the close of all evidence).

86
Q

-If a judgment as a matter of law has been entered against a party…

A
Rule 50(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows that party to file a motion for a new trial no later than 28 days after the entry of judgment.
- A new trial is a way to get the additional evidence into the record. A new trial would also give the plaintiff an opportunity to prove the entire claim and succeed. Even if the motion for a new trial is denied, any evidence properly introduced as part of the motion becomes part of the record that may be considered by a reviewing court on appeal.
87
Q

Renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law

A
  • Not allowed unless the party moved for JMOL at the close of all evidence (i.e., if you didn’t move for JMOL at that time, then you can’t bring a RJMOL).
  • Timing: No later than 28 days after entry of judgment
88
Q

New trials

A

Issue spotter for a new trial: jury awards what appears to be excessive or inadequate damages
• Order granting new trial is not appealable because it is not a final judgment
• Standard for getting a new trial is lower than judgment as a matter of law
Excessive verdict: to address the issue of an excessive verdict the district court may either: (1) order a new trial or (2) offer the plaintiff a choice between a remitted (i.e., reduced) amount of damages and a new trial.

89
Q

Motion for new trial

A
  • Within 28 days after entry of judgment, a party may file a motion for a new trial, or the court can do so on its own
  • A new trial may be granted if the court finds that the verdict is against the GREAT weight of the evidence, the damages awarded are excessive, the trial was unfair, or prejudicial error occurred
90
Q

Two circumstances for new trial

A
  1. Flawed procedure
    a. Lawyer made impermissible argument
    b. Judge erred in admitting a piece of evidence, prejudicial
    c. Prejudicial misconduct of party, attorney, 3rd party, or juror
  2. Flawed verdicts
    a. Most common: Verdict goes against the great weight of the evidence
91
Q

New trial limited to damages: Remittitur

A

Partial new trial on question of damages

• Defendant needs to prove:
o Jury awarded excessive amount of evidence ( considered excessive when it “shocks the conscience”)
o Defendant needs to prove what rsbl amount of damages are in accordance with facts at trial
o If court agrees with defendant, court must give plaintiff a choice: accept lower amount of damages OR new trial

92
Q

Claim preclusion/res judicata

A

o Forbids a party from litigating a claim that was OR could and should have been raised in prior litigation

93
Q

3 requirements for claim preclusion

A

1) Same claim
2) Same parties
3) After a final judgment on the merits

94
Q

Claim preclusion: Same Claim

A

Asks whether claims are RELATED
• Federal courts use the same transaction/ occurrence test to see if claims are RELATED: All claims arising from a single ‘transaction’ or series of related transactions—broadly defined to include matters related in time, space, origin, and motivation—must be litigated in a single, initial lawsuit, or be barred from being raised in subsequent litigation.” (City of vandalia)
-Minority test is the same cause of action test, which looks at similarities between causes of action and the evidence needed to support them

95
Q

Claim preclusion: same parties

A

• Claim preclusion only operates between persons who were parties to both the first and second lawsuit or parties in privity (a person so identified in interest that she represents the same legal right).

96
Q

Rule against non party preclusion under same parties prong

A

Rule Against Non-Party Preclusion: If you weren’t a party to the lawsuit you can’t be bound or affected by the judgment of that lawsuit, meaning you cannot be precluded from bringing up similar claims

97
Q

6 Exceptions to Rule Against Non-Party Preclusion (when a nonparty CAN be bound)

A

1 – express agreement to be bound
2 – preexisting substantive legal relationship w/ someone who was a party to the litigation (new property owner is bound by judgment of easement against previous owner)
3 – adequate representation (by someone with the same interests who was a party)
4 – a party assuming control over prior litigation
5 – party who loses individual suit then sues as the representative of a class
6 – special statutes (bankruptcy, probate)

98
Q

Claim preclusion: after a final judgment on the merits

A

• A final judgment is a final appealable order.
A judgment is on the merits where the claim is resolved at trial or dismissed under any Rule, except lack of jurisdiction, improper venue, or failure to join parties under Rule 19.

99
Q

Claim is Not precluded when

A

 Claim was not a claim at the time of the first suit.
 If the court rendering the first judgment lacked jdx over the allegedly precluded claim.
 Claims arising from the same episode but belonging to different parties.

100
Q

Issue preclusion/collateral estoppel

A

o Issue preclusion bars from relitigation only those issues actually litigated and determined in a prior suit
Does NOT require same parties
o May operate to prevent either party from relitigating issue already decided in prior lawsuit

101
Q

Issue preclusion 5 requirements

A

When
[1] an issue of fact or law is
[2] actually litigated and determined by
[3] a valid and final judgment, and
[4] the determination is essential to the judgment, and
[5] the would-be victim of issue preclusion had an adequate opportunity and incentive to litigate the issue (in the earlier proceeding),
-the determination is conclusive in a subsequent action between the parties, whether on the same or a different claim.

102
Q

Offensive issue preclusion

A
  • Plaintiff seeks to prevent Def from (re)litigating (in Suit#2) an issue Def already litigated and lost (in Suit#1)
  • Nonmutual: Different plaintiffs, same defendant
103
Q

4 Fairness considerations for when offensive non-mutual issue preclusion might be okay

A

1 – did ∏ (in SUIT#2) have opportunity to join (intervene) in SUIT#1 ?
2 – did Δ (in SUIT#2) have the incentive to litigate the issue fully and vigorously (in SUIT#1) ? (Most important)
– If no=issue preclusion is not allowed
3 – are there multiple, inconsistent prior judgments ?
4 – are there procedural opportunities available (to Δ) in SUIT#2 that were not available (to Δ) in SUIT#1 ?

104
Q

Defensive issue preclusion

A

• Def seeks to prevent plaintiff from (re)litigating an issue plaintiff already litigated and lost