Civil Procedure Flashcards
Transfer of venue
To transfer venue, the defendant must show either that venue is improper in the plaintiff’s chosen venue or that venue should be transferred, in the interests of justice, for the convenience of the parties and witnesses. Where venue is proper, transfer may be made to another district in which the action might have been brought or to which all the parties have consented. When venue is improper, transfer must be to a venue where the action could have been brought.
Where venue is proper
Venue is proper in a judicial district in which any defendant resides if all defendants reside in the same state, where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred or a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated, or if neither of these apply, to any district where a defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction for the action.
Discovery
A party may seek to obtain any non privileged material that is relevant to the cause of action and is reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence on a claim or defense.
Subject matter jurisdiction
SMJ refers to the courts ability to hear a type of case. A lack of SMJ is not raised by failing to raise it at trial and it may be raised at any time, including on appeal. There are two main bases for jurisdiction, federal question jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction. Each claim asserted in federal court must have either an independent basis for jurisdiction or be within the court’s supplemental jurisdiction.
Supplemental jurisdiction
If a court does not have original jurisdiction over a claim, it may be able to hear the claim under its supplemental jurisdiction. A DJ claim will invoke supplemental jurisdiction if it arises from a common nucleus of operative facts as the claim that invokes DJ and where one would normally expect the claims to be tried in the same action. Supplemental jurisdiction cannot be used to override the complete diversity requirement.
Personal jurisdiction
Personal jurisdiction refers to the courts ability to exercise power over a particular defendant. Traditionally, personal jurisdiction is based on where a party is domiciled, presence in the forum when served, or consent. An exercise of personal jurisdiction must be authorized by state law through a long arm statute and it must be constitutional. In analyzing the constitutional requirements for jurisdiction, the court will examine the defendants contacts with the forum, the relatedness of the claim to those contacts, and whether jurisdiction over the defendant is fair.
Res Judicata
Claim preclusion bars a litigant in a prior action from bringing the same cause of action again. For it to apply, a party must show an earlier, valid judgement on the merits; the cases are brought by the same claimant against the same defendant; the same cause of action or claim is involved in the later suit; the cause of action was actually litigated or could have been litigated.
- CA’s primary rights doctrine
Collateral Estoppel
Issue preclusion estops a party in a prior case from relitigating an issue that was resolved in a prior case and requires a showing that: the first case ended in a valid and final judgement on the merits; the issue was actually litigated and determined in the prior case; that the issue was essential to the prior judgement; and that the issues are identical.
Motion for a judgement as a matter of law
A judge may grant a motion for judgement as a matter of law when the evidence, viewed in a light most favorable to the party against whom the verdict would be directed, is such that a reasonable juror could only come to one conclusion.
Diversity jurisdiction
Federal courts have diversity jurisdiction when the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and the lawsuit is between citizens of different states or citizens of a state and citizen of a foreign country. DJ requires complete diversity between opposing sides and an individual’s citizenship is determined by where they are domiciled.
Forum non conveniens
Even where venue is proper, the discretionary doctrine of forum non conveniens allows a federal court, for the connivence of the parties and witnesses and in the interests of justice, to transfer a civil action to any other district where it might have been brought, or if transfer is not possible, to dismiss the action. Federal courts must evaluate both public and private factors in making this decision. This includes the availability of the forum, the plaintiff’s choice of forum, and the states interest in providing relief. Also included are considerations for connivence of parties and witnesses, location of evidence, and where the cause of action arose. Venue cannot be transferred to a foreign jurisdiction.
Relation back doctrine
When the statute of limitations has run, a defendant may be added and the filing of the amended claim will “relate back” to the date the original complaint was filed, when the amended adding the new defendant arises out of the same transaction or occurrence and within 120 days after filing, the newly added defendant received such notice of the action that it would not be prejudiced and that but for the mistake concerning identity, the action would have been brought against it.
Timing of removal
A case must be removed within 30 days of the date the defendant discovers the case is removable and all defendants must join in the removal. For cases based on diversity, removal may not be had more than one year after the case was filed unless there is a showing of bad faith by the plaintiff.
Appeals
Generally only final orders may be appealable. A party may seek review of certain interlocutory orders when the trial judge certifies that the interlocutory (nonfinal) order involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for a difference of opinion and an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation and the court of appeals agrees to allow the appeal. Additionally, a party may seek an extraordinary writ of mandamus or prohibition as a means of review on a showing irreparable harm if the normal appeals process is followed, and the petitioner must show a beneficial interest in the outcome of the writ proceeding.
Compulsory joinder
Compulsory joinder looks to see if the absentee should be joined, if the absentee can be joined, and if they cannot be joined, whether the action should proceed without the absentee.
The absentee should be joined when complete relief cannot be granted without the absent party, or the absentee has such an interest in the subject matter of the lawsuit that his absence will impair his ability to protect his interest or will leave the other parties at risk of inconsistent obligations.
