Civ Pro

Question 1

Issue Preclusion

Answer 1

A valid and final judgment binds the plaintiff, defendant, and their privies in subsequent actions on different causes of action between them (or their privies) as to the same issues actually litigated and essential to the judgment in the first action.

Question 2

Elements of Issue Preclusion

Answer 2

1. If an issue of law and fact
2. Is actually litigated & determined
3. By a valid and final judgment
4. And the determination is essential to the judgment

Question 3

Nonmutual Issue Preclusion

Answer 3

The parties to the second case were not all parties to the first case. Can only be applied against a party who has litigated and lost the issue.

Question 4

Mutual Issue Preclusion

Answer 4

The parties to the second case were all parties to the first case (Illinois RR v. Parks)

Question 5

Non-mutual defensive issue preclusion

Answer 5

When the defendant in the second case argues for issue preclusion based on the outcome of the first case. (Blonder-Tongue)

Question 6

Non-mutual offensive issue preclusion

Answer 6

When the plaintiff in the second case argues for issue preclusion based on the outcome of the first case. (Parklane)
Trial courts have broad discretion to determine when it should be applied.

Question 7

Issue Preclusion Exceptions

Answer 7

Not be applied where:
1. The party who lost the 1st case could not have appealed
2. The issue is legal and the law has changed in the interim
3. The procedures in the 1st case were much more limited than in the 2nd
4. The burdens are different in the 2 cases
5. The party who lost the first case did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate
6. Certain public Policy Reasons

Question 8

Preservation Requirement

Answer 8

Where party MUST “preserve” issues for appellate review by presenting to the trial court the contentions which it wants ruling. Failure to do so = waiver. Appellant CANNOT raise an argument on appeal that was not made below.

Question 9

Plain Error Rule

Answer 9

An exception to the general requirement that an issue must be raised in the trial court as predicate to having it addressed on appeal.

Question 10

Standard of Review

Answer 10

The criteria by which an appellate court exercising appellate jurisdiction measures the constitutionality of a statute or the propriety of an order, finding, or judgment entered by a lower court.

Question 11

Legal Questions or Questions of law are reviewed:

Answer 11

De Novo - looks as if DC never decided it at all - reviews evidence & law without deference to the trial court rulings

Question 12

Findings of Fact are reviewed:

Answer 12

For Clear Error - a judgment will be upheld UNLESS the appeals court is left with the firm conviction that an error has been committed.

Question 13

Matters of Discretion are reviewed for:

Answer 13

Abuse of Discretion: An appellate court’s standard for reviewing a decision that is asserted to be grossly unsound, unreasonable, illegal or unsupported by the evidence. Where the DC goes outside of their discretion.

Question 14

Dicta

Answer 14

A statement made by the court in a ruling that is NOT necessary to support the court’s decision.

Question 15

Claim Preclusion (Definition & Elements)

Answer 15

Doctrine of res judicata that prohibits the same parties for litigating the same claim or claim that could have been raised after there has been a final judgment on the merits.
1. Case 1 and Case 2 must be brought by the same claimant against the same defendant
2. That Case 1 ended in a valid judgment on the merits
3. The claimant asserted the same claim in case 1 and case 2.

Question 16

Claim Preclusion Exceptions

Answer 16

Will not be applied where:
1. The parties agreed to allow claim-splitting
2. A court in the first case preserved the plaintiff’s right to bring the second case
3. Where jurisdictional limits prevented the plaintiff from seeking certain relief in the first case
4. Certain exceptional policy or fairness concerns

Question 17

Full Faith and Credit

Answer 17

17(c) The recognition, acceptance and enforcement of the laws, orders and judgments by one state of another state’s legal decisions. (V.L v. E.L.)

Question 18

Collateral Attack

Answer 18

An attack on a judgment in a proceeding other than a direct appeal

Question 19

Direct Attack

Answer 19

An attack on a judgment made in the same proceeding as the one in which the judgment was entered.

Question 20

Privity

Answer 20

A substantive legal relationship between two or more parties.

Question 21

What creates privity?

Answer 21

1. Agreements to be bound
2. Preexisting substantive relationships (property interests)
3. Adequate representation by a party representing same interest (guardians, trustees, class actions)
4. Party “assumed control” of the litigation
5. Party lost individual suit then litigated through proxy
6. Special statutory schemes

Question 22

What does NOT create privity

Answer 22

1. Person knowing of first suit
2. Person could have intervened in first suit
3. Person served as a witness in first suit
4. Person hired the same lawyer
5. Person is a family member
6. Person was interested in outcome of first suit
7. Person is a partner of a party
8. First suit fully & adequately addressed the same issue.
9. Virtual Representation

Question 23

Virtual Representation

Answer 23

The principle that a judgment may bind a person who is not a party to the litigation if one of the parties is so closely aligned w the nonparty’s interests. (Taylor)

Question 24

Rule 60(b)

Answer 24

Reopening a federal court judgment - Such relief should be granted only when necessary to prevent a “grave miscarriage of justice.”

Question 25

NOT a judgment on the merits

Answer 25

- Improper venue - Personal or subject matter jurisdiction - Party Joinder - Plaintiffs voluntary dismissal (GENERALLY)

Question 26

Stare Decisis

Answer 26

When a court must follow the legal rulings issued by another court whose rulings it is bound to follow.

Question 27

Taylor v. Sturgell

Answer 27

A claim cannot be precluded if the previous litigant is a different party AND there is no legal relationship between the current and past litigants.

Question 28

Final Judgment Rule

Answer 28

§ 1291 - A decision by the district court that ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute a judgment. Appeals are available after entry.

Question 29

Interlocutory Decision

Answer 29

- Do not resolve the entire case or dispose of all claims - Generally cannot appeal after these

Question 30

Exceptions to the final judgment rule

Answer 30

1. Injunctions 2. Certified Issues 3. 54(b) motions 4. Practical Finality a. Collateral order rule b. Writs of Mandamus

Question 31

Injunctions

Answer 31

§ 1292(a) - an appeal is allowed from an interlocutory order of the district court that “grants, continues, modifies, refuses or dissolves the injunction or refuses to dissolve or modify the injunction.” Party appealing does not have to ask the court permission, COA must take the appeal.

Question 32

Certified Issues

Answer 32

§ 1292(b) The case is one which has an issue with a “substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation.” - Comes up when there is a controlling question of law & the DC judge cannot decide which way to rule (Courts are split/may not be a precedent set for that law) - IN WRITING - DC judge asks COA permission

Question 33

Rule §54(b)

Answer 33

The court may direct an entry of a final judgment as to one or more BUT fewer than all claims or parties only if the court determines there is no just reason for delay. Applies where part of the case is finally decided and otherwise ready for appeal (Wetzel)

Question 34

Collateral Order Doctrine

Answer 34

1. Must conclusively determine the disputed question 2. Resolve an important issue completely separate from the merits of the action/case and 3. Be effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment.

Question 35

Case 1 (in state court) + Case 2 (in state or federal court) =

Answer 35

State Preclusion Law

Question 36

Case 1 (in federal court in state #1) + Case 2 (in federal court in state #2) =

Answer 36

Federal Preclusion Law

Question 37

Case 1 (Federal Court for Diversity in State #1) + Case 2 (wherever) =

Answer 37

Federal law will presumably adopt the law of the state in which it sat (State #1) but not bound by state law. (Semtek)

Question 38

28 U.S. Code § 1441

Answer 38

Removal of Civil Actions

Question 39

Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 24 / Transactional Test

Answer 39

When a final judgment extinguishes a claim, it extinguishes "all rights of the plaintiff" against the defendant "with respect to the transaction or series of transactions" from which the claim arose. (same transaction i.e. car crash)

Question 40

"Identical" Cause of Action Test

Answer 40

Causes of action are identical where the evidence necessary to sustain a second verdict would sustain the first. (Evidence/facts from case are looked at) BUT If the court can’t tell from a verdict what issue was actually decided by the jury in the first case, the general rule is that issue preclusion will not apply in the second case.

Question 41

Judicial Notice

Answer 41

An exception to the court of appeals being limited to the record of evidence from the district court. Gives COA power to rely on facts that are well-established by reliable sources, even if they are not part of the record on appeal.

Question 42

Bar

Answer 42

A losing Plaintiff cannot re-sue a winning defendant on the same cause of action

Question 43

Merger

Answer 43

A winning plaintiff cannot re-sue a losing defendant on the same cause of action.

Question 44

When might a court in one state have to apply another state's law?

Answer 44

To determine the preclusive effect of a judgment entered by a different court.

Question 45

Practical Finality

Answer 45

1. An order conclusively determines a disputed question and 2. It resolves an important issue completely separate from the merits 3. Effectively reviewable on appeal from a final judgement

Question 46

1367(a)

Answer 46

Is there jurisdiction here? Does the claim come from the same case or controversy as the anchor claim? (Are not required to keep state claim)

Question 47

1367(c)

Answer 47

Sets forth grounds upon which the federal DCs may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a claim. (Federal court wouldn’t want to step on state courts toes when it comes to interpreting state law.

Question 48

1367(c)(1)

Answer 48

Where the claim raises a novel or complex issue of state law - state can interpret better than federal court.

Question 49

1367(c)(2)

Answer 49

Where the state claim substantially predominates over those which have subject matter jurisdiction. Court will look at Type of cases involved Evidence/proof required Scope of issues raised Remedies sought. (If very different, court has discretion to decline.)

Question 50

1367(c)(3)

Answer 50

Where the federal court has dismissed all the claims that had supplemental jurisdiction

Question 51

1367(c)(4)

Answer 51

Where there are other compelling reasons in exceptional circumstances.

Question 52

Reise v. Board of Regents

Answer 52

Trial court decisions regarding discovery matters are interlocutory orders, rather than final orders, and cannot be appealed prior to a final order.

Question 53

Liberty Mutual v. Wetzel

Answer 53

A finding of liability that does not finally dispose of the plaintiff’s prayers for relief is not appealable to the court of appeals. Appealable under 54(b)

Question 54

Lauro Lines

Answer 54

Only final decisions are appealable, except those orders that conclusively determine the disputable question, resolve an important issue completely separate from the merits of the action, and are effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment. (Cohen)

Question 55

Anderson v. Bessemer City

Answer 55

A finding of fact isn't clearly erroneous just because an appellate court would've reached a different conclusion. Clear error standard.

Question 56

Ison v. Thomas

Answer 56

Plaintiff must raise ALL claims against a single defendant arising out of the same transaction, or series of connected transactions in a SINGLE action.

Question 57

Frier v. City of Vandalia

Answer 57

A judgment on one claim will bar a plaintiff from bringing a second claim based on the same transaction, even if the second claim does not involve exactly the same evidence.

Question 58

Taylor v. Sturgell

Answer 58

A non-party to the previous claim has a due process right to a day in court unless they were in privy with the party from the first claim.

Question 59

Semtek

Answer 59

The claim-preclusive effect of a dismissal by a federal court exercising diversity jurisdiction is determined by the law of the state in which the federal diversity court sits.

Question 60

Gargallo v. Merrill Lynch

Answer 60

A judgment issued by a state court lacking subject-matter jurisdiction over an exclusively federal claim does not preclude litigation of the claim in federal court.

Question 61

Federated Department Stores

Answer 61

An exception does not exist to the doctrine of res judicata for individual equitable or fairness purposes.

Question 62

Mottley

Answer 62

For federal jurisdiction to exist, a plaintiffs cause of action must arise under the Constitution or federal laws and the complaint must allege D violated a federal law.

Question 63

Redner

Answer 63

No diversity jurisdiction to get into a federal court when one of the parties is not domiciled

Question 64

Domicile

Answer 64

Established by physical presence in a place in connection with a certain state of mind concerning one’s intent to remain there

Question 65

Test of Citizenship

Answer 65

1. Present Domicile 2. Intent to remain indefinitely

Question 66

1332(a)(1)

Answer 66

Suit between citizens of different states

Question 67

1332(a)(2)

Answer 67

Suits between a citizen of a state and a citizen or subject of a foreign state

Question 68

1332(a)(3)

Answer 68

Suits between citizens of different states and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties

Question 69

1332(d)

Answer 69

Suits between a foreign state as the plaintiff and citizens of a state or different states. Ex: Government of France suing a US citizen.

Question 70

Hertz Corp

Answer 70

A corporation’s principal place of business, for federal diversity-jurisdiction purposes, refers to the place where the corporation’s high-level officers direct, control, and coordinate the company’s activities. (Never center) (but also where they were incorporated)

Question 71

In re Ameriquest Mortgage Co.

Answer 71

A federal court has supplemental jurisdiction over any state-law claims that are part of the same case or controversy as the federal claim.

Question 72

Szendrey-Ramos

Answer 72

Supplemental jurisdiction should not be exercised over claims that posit novel and complex issues of state law OR substantially predominate over the federal claims.

Question 73

In Rem

Answer 73

“Against a thing” - Involving or determining the status of a thing, and therefore the rights of persons generally with respect to that thing.

Question 74

In Personam

Answer 74

“Against a person” - Involving or determining the personal rights and obligations of the parties.

Question 75

Quasi in-rem

Answer 75

Where a state court seizes the D's forum-state property to secure a P's personal claims against the D whether or not the claims are related to the seized property.

Question 76

International Shoe

Answer 76

Created the modern personal jurisdiction framework - In personam jurisdiction require D's to have minimum contacts w the forum state and P's claim arises or relates to those contacts.

Question 77

Shaffer v. Heitner

Answer 77

Greyhound stock case - answered test for in-rem - minimum contacts are required for a state court to exercise quasi in-rem jurisdiction over a non-consenting, out-of-state D. If claim had no relation to forum state (even if D owns property there) = no PJ

Question 78

Ford Motor Co

Answer 78

2 residents of dif state got in accidents-- Ford cultivated a market for its products within those states subjecting itself to specific jurisdiction unlike WWVW.

Question 79

Choice of Law

Answer 79

Designates the law that applies the case of a contract dispute.

Question 80

Choice of Forum Law

Answer 80

Designates the judicial forum for all cases brought by either party to enforce the contract. Contract doesn't say what law is applied but a particular place.

Question 81

Consent to Jurisdiction

Answer 81

One or both parties consent to being sued in a forum state, meaning they cannot CONTEST PJ. Unlike forum, not all suits between parties have to be in particular the particular state.

Question 82

Consent to Service

Answer 82

One or both parties consent to a particular type of service

Question 83

Daimler

Answer 83

Court cannot exercise general jurisdiction over a foreign D unless tht D has continuous & systematic contacts w forum state that D can be considered at home in that state. P(foreign) D: DL/NJ Forum: CA fed. If brought in CA - Int shoe due process protections would deteriorate.

Question 84

Burnham

Answer 84

Although D did not have general jurisdiction and marriage happened in WV,

Question 85

Transient Jurisdiction

Answer 85

Personal jurisdiction over a defendant who is served with process while in the forum state only temporarily such as during travel.

Question 86

Tag Jurisdiction

Answer 86

A way for a court in one state to constitutionally assert personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant who visits the state where the court presides. Court has PJ when D is properly served.

Question 87

Bristol Myers Squibb

Answer 87

Specific jurisdiction over nonresident plaintiffs claims could NOT be based solely on Bristol-Myer's connection to the CA plaintiffs. Their general connection w CA in-state research was unrelated to the claim, therefore insufficient basis for jurisdiction.

Question 88

Carnival Cruises

Answer 88

A forum-selection clause is not fundamentally unfair solely because the clause was not negotiated. → even if the parties did not negotiate the terms of the clause as long as it is fundamentally fair

Question 89

Mullane

Answer 89

Notice in newspaper no longer constitutionally adequate. Notice must be (1) Reasonably calculated to inform interested parties of action (2) Interested parties can reasonably object.

Question 90

Newspaper Notices are okay when

Answer 90

1. The individual is not identified (The number of beneficiaries and their identities were difficult or impossible to track) 2. Individuals who can’t be located with due diligence (With modern technology, it’s easier to locate people) BUT in Mullane the cost of tracking down these numerous beneficiaries for personal notice was enormous, and this burden should not be placed upon Central Hanover. 3. Individuals whose interests are uncertain or unknown.

Question 91

Gibbons

Answer 91

A nonresident who sues in a state's court doesn't by that act alone establish sufficient minimum contacts with the state that the nonresident can be named as a defendant in other lawsuits.

Question 92

Long Arm Statute

Answer 92

A state statute extending jurisdiction over nonresidents who have had contacts with such state.

Question 93

Test for PJ in state court over non residents

Answer 93

1. P must allege sufficient jurisdictional facts to bring D within the coverage of the long-arm statute. 2. Whether sufficient minimum contacts are shown to comply with the requirements of due process.

Question 94

Gestalt Factors

Answer 94

(1) D's burden (2) Forum states interest in adjudicating (3) P's interest in obtaining complete & effective relief (4) Judicial system's interest in effective resolution (5) Policy interests --> All weighed by court to determine PJ over nonresident is reasonable.

Question 95

Forum non conveniens

Answer 95

Refers to a court's discretionary power to decline to exercise its jurisdiction whether another court may more conveniently hear a case.