Cases Flashcards
Shady Grove
Erie - example of federal rule on point (rule 23)
Piper aircraft
SMJ - forum non conveiniens - P cannot be left without forum to sue
Mitchell
Opportunity to be heard - sequestration is constitutional. Risk of wrongful deprivation was minimized by the vendor’s interest in preventing waste of property.
Osborn
SMJ - federal question - “federal ingredient” “arising under”overturned by Mottley
strawbridge
SMJ - complete diversity no P and D can be from same state
Twombly
Pleading - overturns Conley. Federal Rule 8(a)(2) requires only a short and plain statement
Mas V. Perry
SMJ - diversity
Hanna
Erie - 2 prongs of Hanna, twin aims of Erie
Taylor v. Sturgell
binding non-parties- SC rejects virtual representation
Guaranty Trust
Erie - outcome determinative test
Adickes
Summary judgment.- 12(b)(6) requires more facts
Goodyear
PJ -“defendant must be so fundamentally at home in the forum state that the relatedness b/t the contacts and cause of action is irrelevant
Rush v. City of maple heights
Issue Preclusion - a single tort can be but the basis of one action. Plaintiff must allege all claims arising in an action
Fuentes
opportunity to be heard - replevin provision is unconstitutional, dignity and interests need to be protected
Dred Scott
SMJ- alienage jurisdiction - if alien/resident, deemed to be a citizen of the state they’re domiciled in
Bernhard
non-mutual defensive collateral estoppel - determining the validity of res judicata (elements)
Dusenberry
Rule 4 - Due process doesn’t require heroic efforts. You don’t need to give better notice just because it’s available.
Ankerbrandt
SMJ - challenge to SMJ family law traditionally a state matter (domestic case)
Hanson
PJ -“Purposeful availment” benefits and protections of the forum state
Gilbert
SMJ - removal - public/private interest
Gibbs
SMJ- supplemental jurisdiction CNOF “same transaction or occurrence”
Parklane Hoisery
non mutual offensive estoppel - increases the number of lawsuits a P will wait to see which claims succeed against diff def IN CASES WHERE A PLAINTIFF COULD HAVE EASILY JOINED A DEF OR WHERE THE DEF MAY BE UNFAIRLY PREJUDICED, A TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD NOT ALLOW THE USE OF OFFENSIVE COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL
Exxon Mobile
SMJ - supplemental jurisdiction - class action, party leader met diversity but not all members did, class action under rule 23 is not barred by 1367(b)
Gray
PJ- BINDING IN IL ONLY “long-arm statute” last place of action is where tort was committed
celetox
summary judgement- 2 ways that a def moving for summary judgement can meet the “no genuine issue of fact” requirement in cases where the P bears the burden of proof at trial.
Burnham
PJ- tag jurisdiction “tradition justifies the exercise of power”
Conley
pleading factual impossibility test (Rule 8). overturned by Twombly
AFA Tours
SMJ - diversity - court must give P opportunity to prove that the amount in controversy is met
International shoe
PJ - systematic, continuous and sufficient contacts with forum
McGee
PJ -“isolated and sporadic contact” “one contact with the forum can be sufficient when it’s highly relevant to the cause of action” “Sovereign state interest”
Burger King
PJ - contact factor: relevant contact reflects purposeful availment. fairness factor: mere inconvenience isn’t enough to constitute unfairness, it would be unconstitutional to litigate in the forum ,then it’s unfair. contract
Mottley
SMJ- federal question - “well-pleaded compliant” fed question must arise from P’s complaint and cause of action NOT as an affirmative defense or response to anticipated defense. Overturned Osborn
McIntyre
PJ - “selling a product through a third-party is not sufficient to establish minimum contacts”
Hess
PJ - maintained Pennoyer - “minimum contacts” “Systematic and continuous” and “relatedness”
Gasperini
Erie - state v. federal shocks the conscience/higher bar and abuse of discretion
Mullane
Rule 4 - challenges - no PJ over out of state beneficiaries and accuracy of notice
Byrd
Erie - balancing state and federal interests
Perkins
PJ - “continuous substantial relationship with forum”
Shaffer
PJ - all assertion of jur. must be evaluated with international shoe and its progeny in mind (need minimum contacts for quasi-in-rem)
Carnival Cruise
PJ - “forum selection clause” a def’s choice of forum is proper ex ante if the def has a special interest and the plaintiff benefits from it
Swift v. Tyson
Erie - Federal General Common Law (said state common law did not have to be followed by fed ct)
Iqbal
pleading - holds that Twombly applies to all cases (transubstantive) complaint must be plausible
Klaxon
SMJ - transfer - fed court should turn to state choice of law that the transferor would apply. the transferee court should apply the state choice of law that the transferor court unless it was an improper venue.
Goldberg
opportunity to be heard - where the stakes are so high there needs to be some process before deprivation (3 part test)
Pennoyer
PJ - 4 traditional bases, notice by newspaper publication was insufficient
Greene
Rule 4 - need constructive notice under the 14th Amendment
Erie
overturned swift - RDA, court MUST follow “substantive state law”
Hickman
Discovery - when reviewing scope of 26(b) is it relevant? is it privileged?
Marshall v. Marshall
SMJ- challenge to SMJ - probate cases
Dioguardi
pleading - burden of pleading determines who is required to introduce the issue into litigation
Asahi
PJ - “mere awareness of the potential profit doesn’t suffice as a minimum contact” Purposeful direction
Helicopteros
PJ - similar to Perkins - no PJ on the corp
Bristol Meyers-Squibb
PJ - def had tons of contacts with CA (offices, employees, etc) but claim doesn’t arise in CA. Def’s contact MUST include the VERY product that hurt the plaintiff
Worldwide Volkswagen
PJ -“purposeful availment in the forum create a reasonable anticipation that the def can be haled in to court in the forum.” sufficient interests of the plaintiff, def and state
Hertz
SMJ - diversity “nerve center” is where the corp. is incorporated or headquartered.
Lacks v. Lacks
SMJ a judgment rendered without SMJ is void
