1. Are We In The Right Court (Personal Jurisdiction, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Venue) Flashcards
What is the two-step analysis for determining personal jurisdiction over a defendant?
- Satisfy a state statute AND
2. Satisfy the constitution (due process)
What is the statutory analysis needed for MBE?
Varies by state but if constitutional test is met then the state says jurisdiction is ok.
What is the constitutional analysis for determining personal jurisdiction?
Does the defendant have such minimum contacts with the forum so jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice?
What are the three conditions where persona jurisdiction is definitely met?
When defendant:
- is domiciled in the forum or
- consents or
- is voluntarily present in the forum when served with process
Where personal jurisdiction is not clearly constitutional what three factors must be assessed?
- Contact
- Relatedness
- Fairness (only with specific PJ)
Contact
personal jurisdiction
There must be a relevant contact between defendant and the forum state shown through:
- PURPOSEFUL AVAILMENT: D must reach out to the forum and cause an effect there) and
- FORESEEABILITY: must be foreseeable that D could be sued in the forum
Relatedness
personal jurisdiction
There must be relatedness between this contact and plaintiff’s claim: plaintiff’s claim arise from defendant’s contact with the forum.
If this is the case then there is specific personal jurisdiction.
General Personal Jurisdiction
Defendant must be “home” (domiciled) in the forum. Human defendant can have only one domicile. Defendant can be sued there for a claim arising anywhere.
Domicile/Citizenship
corporation
- Where incorporated OR
2. Where is has its principle place of business
Fairness
balancing test
Whether jurisdiction would be fair (or reasonable) under the circumstances is determined ONLY for specific personal jurisdiction by balancing:
(1) BURDEN ON DEFENDANT AND WITNESSES: severe disadvantage in litigation; not about convenience and relative wealth of the parties in not determinative
(2) STATE’S INTEREST: always true if plaintiff is a citizen of the forum because forum state wants to provide a courtroom for its citizens who are harmed by out-of-staters
(3) PLAINTIFF’S INTEREST: maybe injured and wants to sue at home
What is personal jurisdiction?
The court’s power over the parties. Because plaintiff filed case there is automatic personal jurisdiction over the plaintiff.
In Rem and Quasi in Rem Jurisdiction
Court’s power over the defendant’s property in the forum. It must be attached by the court at the outset of the case. Constitutionality requires that defendant’s contacts with he forum must meet the constitutional test for in personam.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Court’s power over the case and each discrete claim.
Which court has general subject matter jurisdiction?
State court
Which case can’t a state court hear?
Cases arising under a few federal law such as (1) patent infringement, (2) bankruptcy, and (3) some federal securities and antitrust claims
Which court has limited subject matter jurisdiction?
Federal court
What are the two main types of cases that can be heard in federal court?
- Diversity of Citizenship
2. Federal Question
Diversity of Citizenship (and Alienage Cases)
- The case is either (a) between citizens of different states (diversity) OR (b) between a citizen of a state and a citizen of a foreign country (alienage) AND
- The amount in controversy EXCEEDS $75k
Note: We look to citizenship at the time the case was filed
Complete Diversity Rule
No good if any plaintiff is a citizen of the same state as any defendant
What is the prohibition on alienage?
There is a special rule that prohibits alienage if a green card alien is domiciled in he same US state as a litigant on the other side of the case
What are the two factors required to establish a new domicile?
- physical presence AND
2. the intent to make that their permanent home
Where is a corporation’s principle place of business?
Where managers direct, coordinate, and control corporate activities
What is the citizenship of an unincorporated association (partnership or LLC)?
Citizenship of ALL its members
Whose citizenship controls with decedent, minor, or incompetent?
The representative’s citizenship is irrelevant. Use the citizenship of the decedent, minor, or incompetent.
How does interest factor into amount in controversy?
- Don’t count cost or interest on the claim
2. You might be able to recover interest AS the claim
What is the rule for aggregating claims?
You can aggregate (add two or more claims) claims against one defendant for the purpose of meeting the amount in controversy requirement under diversity jurisdiction even if the claims are unrelated. But it can only be the claims of one plaintiff of one defendant.
Equitable Relief (two viewpoints for meeting amount in controversy)
Plaintiff’s viewpoint: does the injunction decrease the value of the plaintiff’s property by more than $75k
Defendant’s viewpoint: would the injunction cost the defendant more than $75k to comply
Which four cases will federal courts not hear even if diversity requirements are met?
- Divorce
- Alimony
- Child Custody and Support
- To probate an estate
Note: child abuses is not excluded
“Well Pleaded Complaint” Rule
federal question
It is not about that some federal issue is raised by the complaint. The plaintiff’s claim itself must arise under federal law. So ask whether plaintiff was enforcing a federal right
Note: citizenship and amount in controversy do not matter for federal question
Additional Claims
SMJ
Once a case get into federal court whether though diversity or federal question additional claims may be asserted in that case. However every single claim in federal court must have federal subject matter jurisdiction. So every additional claim is tested to see if it invokes diversity of citizenship or federal question.
How do additional claims get into federal court if they do not satisfy diversity of citizenship or federal question?
Supplemental jurisdiction
Supplemental Jurisdiction
test
Gets non-federal, non-diversity claims into federal court if the case itself was already in federal court.
Test: The additional claim must share a “common nucleus of operative fact” with the claim that invoked federal subject matter jurisdiction.
This test is always met when the claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the underlying case.
What is the limitation on supplemental jurisdiction?
In a diversity case, PLAINTIFF cannot use supplemental jurisdiction to overcome a lack of diversity in an additional claim.
So the limitation does not stop plaintiff from overcoming a lack of amount in controversy. It stops plaintiff from overcoming problems of citizenship.
This limitation applies only in diversity cases and only against the plaintiff.
What are the two questions you ask when dealing with a supplemental jurisdiction question?
- Does it meet the test?
Common nucleus of operative fact.
- Does the limitation apply?
Claim asserted by plaintiff in diversity of citizenship case against a citizen of the same state as the plaintiff
What are the discretionary factors under which a court can deny granting supplemental jurisdiction if requirements are met?
- State law is complex
- State law issues would predominate
- Underlying claim is dismissed early (most likely)
Removal
Defendant can remove case from a state trial court to a federal trial court.
What happens if removal is found to be improper?
The federal court remands it back state court
When must removal happen?
Defendant must remove within 30 days of service (not filing) of the first paper that shows the case is removable. Usually within 30 days of service of process.
If a new defendant is joined the 30 days start anew.
Note: Plaintiff can never remove
What cases can be removed?
two big exceptions
General rule: any case that meets the requirement for diversity or federal questions.
TWO EXCEPTIONS (only applies if removal is on the basis of diversity of citizenship jurisdiction)
- No removal if any defendant is a citizen of the forum (in-state defendant) AND
- No removal more than one year after the case was filed in state court
Which federal court would a case be removed to?
Defendant removes to the federal district embracing me the state court where the case was filed
How is a case removed?
- Plaintiff sues defendant in state court. Defendant does not need to seeks permission for removal
- Defendant files notice of removal in federal court, stating grounds of removal, which means federal subject matter jurisdiction (federal question or diversity)
- Defendant attaches all documents that were served on her in state actions. She serves a copy of the notice of removal on adverse parties. Then she files a notice of removal in state court.
What can plaintiff do if she thinks removal is improper?
- If plaintiff thinks removal was improper for some reason other than lack of subject matter jurisdiction (e.g. defendant did not attach relevant papers to her notice of removal), she must move to remand no later than 30 days after notice of removal was filed.
- If plaintiff thinks removal was improper because the federal court lacks subject matter jurisdiction she can remove to state court at anytime. Court must remand if there is no subject matter jurisdiction.
The Erie Doctrine (on in diversity of citizenship cases)
3 steps
Step 1: If there is some federal law on point that directly conflicts with state law then apply the federal law, as long as it is valid. (“the supremacy clause”) Validity is determined if:
rule doesn’t modify substantive rights. This is
probably met if the rule is arguably procedural. None
has ever been held invalid.
Step 2: If there is no federal law on point, the federal judge must apply state law if the issue to be determined is substantive. The four issues that are clearly substantive:
1. elements of a claim or defense
2. statute of limitation (bar exam classic)
3. rules for tolling statutes of limitation and
4. conflict (or choice) of law rules
Step 3: If there is not federal law on point and the issue is not one of the four listed, the federal judge must determine whether the issue substantive based on:
1. outcome determinative: would applying or ignoring
the state rule affect outcome of case? If so then
substantive.
2. balance of interest: does either federal or state
system have strong interest in having its rule applied
3. avoid forum shopping: if federal court ignores state
law on this issue, will it cause parties flock to federal
court? If so, go with state.
Federal Common Law
There are areas in which federal courts are free to make up common law on their own such as with international relations, admiralty, disputes between states, the right to sue a federal officer for violating one’s federal rights.
Venue
Tells exactly which federal court.
Where may the plaintiff lay venue?
Plaintiff may lay venue in any district where:
- ALL defendants reside OR
- a substantial part of the claim arose
What is the special venue rule?
If all defendants reside in different districts of the same state plaintiff can law venue in the district in which ANY defendant reside.
Where des a human reside for venue purpose?
In the district where domiciled.
Where does a business (corporation or non-incorporated) reside?
In all districts where subject to personal jurisdiction for this case
Transfer of Venue
A federal district court may transfer the case to another federal district court but ONLY where the case could have been filed. So the transferee must be a proper venue AND have personal jurisdiction over the defendant without waiver
What is the exception to the transfer of venue rule?
The court can transfer to any district (even an improper venue) if all parties consent (unlikely that plaintiff will do so) and the court finds cause for the transfer.
What are the two transfer statutes?
- If the original district is a proper venue, that court CAN (always discretionary) order transfer based on convenience of parties and witnesses and on the interest of justice by looking at public and private factors showing that transferee is the center of gravity
PUBLIC: things like what law applies, what
community should be burdened with jury service,
the desire to keep a local controversy in the local
court
PRIVATE: convenience. For example, where the
evidence and witnesses are - If the original district is an improper venue the court may transfer in the interest of just OR dismiss
Forum Selection Clause
If the parties entered a contract saying that a dispute will be litigated in a particular district, the court will almost always transfer to that district. The parties are deemed to have agreed that the private factors support litigation in that district.
Forum Non Conveniens
There is another court that is the center of gravity that makes more sense than the present court put the court does not transfer because the more convenient court is in a different judicial system so transfer is impossible. The court either dismisses or stays (holds in abeyance). Dismissal is almost never granted if plaintiff is a resident of the present forum
What are the requirement for that convenient court?
forum non conveniens
The other court must be available and ADEQUATE, which simply requires that plaintiff gets her day in court.
