Chapter 2: The Courts and Jurisdiction

Question 1

Trial Court

Answer 1

A court where the parties to a lawsuit file their pleadings and present evidence to a judge or jury

Question 2

Lower courts

Answer 2

Another terms for a trial court

Question 3

Jurisdiction

Answer 3

The power that a court has to hear a particular case; requires that a court has the power to hear the type of case (subject matter) and that a court has power to render a decision against a particular defendant (personal) or over property (in rem)

Question 4

Original jurisdiction

Answer 4

The power of a court to conduct a trial in a case; confers a court the right to be the first court to hear the matter

Question 5

Court of Appeals

Answer 5

A court of review; this court reviews decisions from a trial court

Question 6

Brief

Answer 6

A written analysis of the facts and law related to a case, written by the attorneys handling the case, and filed in a trial or appellate court. Briefs are also filed in the Supreme Court

Question 7

Legal Error

Answer 7

A mistake in the way the court interprets or applies the law. Examples of legal errors include a judge’s misstating the law when instructing the jury or allowing attorneys to introduce evidence that is not relevant to the case or that has been improperly obtained

Question 8

Appellate jurisidction

Answer 8

The power of a court to review the decision of a lower court or administrative agency. Appellate review is usually conducted by a 3-judge panel and cases are decided by a majority vote (two of the three)

Question 9

higher court

Answer 9

Another term for a court with appellate jurisdiction

Question 10

affirm

Answer 10

An appellate court’s upholding of the lower court’s decision

Question 11

reverse

Answer 11

The act of an appellate court setting aside the decision of a lower court

Question 12

remand

Answer 12

The act of an appellate court sending a case back to the lower court after reversing a decision, often with specific instructions as to how the lower court must deal with the case

Question 13

supreme court

Answer 13

A name given to the highest court in the federal court system and to many, but not all, of the highest court in state court systems

Question 14

Intermediate courts versus courts of last resort

Answer 14

Unlike intermediate courts of appeals that must review cases in which the parties request a review, courts of last resort generally have discretionary right to review the cases. In other words, these courts hear only those appeals that they want to hear

Question 15

Certiorari

Answer 15

A term used in connection with appellate proceedings indicating that the reviewing court wants the lower court to send the higher court its record, so that the proceedings can be reviewed. When parties ask the US Supreme Court to hear a case, they often file a petition for writ of certiorari, which, if granted, means that the Supreme Court will review the record in the case

Question 16

U.S. District Courts

Answer 16

The U.S. and its territories are divided into 94 districts, each having a federal district court. Some larger districts are further subdivided into divisions. Each state has at least one federal district court in its boundaries and, depending on population, a state may have more. The number of judges assigned to each district varies according to need. District courts are trial courts. Thus, if a lawsuit were pursued in the federal court system, it would start in a district court. The complaint and answer are filed in that court, and any trial takes place there

Question 17

Miscellaneous Federal Trial Courts

Answer 17

The federal court system includes various specialized trial courts, including bankruptcy courts, the U./s. Court of International Trade, and the U./s Claims Court. The bankruptcy courts are an “adjunct” to each district court. All bankruptcy proceedings originate there. The U.S. Court of International Trade deals with cases involving international trade and custom duties. The U.S. Claims Court handles suits against the federal government for money damages in numerous civil matters (except for tort claims that must be brought in district court_

Question 18

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Answer 18

The U.S. is divided into 12 geographic appellate circuits, or regions. These courts hear appeals from district courts within their boundaries. In addition to the courts of appeals for each of the 12 geographic appellate districts, there is a 13th federal court of appeals with national jurisdiction. This court hears appeals in patent, copyright, and trademark cases from any district court and all appeals from the U.S. Claims Court and the U.S. Court of International Trade. Generally, when any of the courts of appeals reviews a lower court decision, that decision is reviewed by a 3-judge panel, and the majority decision prevails. However, similar to the district courts, the total number of justices in each appellate court varies according to need

Question 19

U.S. Supreme Court

Answer 19

The U.S. court system has one Supreme Court, consisting of nine justices. The Court is located in Washington, D.C., and holds its sessions from October through June. Primarily, the Supreme Court exercises appellate jurisdiction. In most cases, the exercise of that appellate jurisdiction is discretionary. With limited exceptions, the Supreme Court is not required to hear cases in which a party requests review. In deciding whether to grant a hearing in a case, the Court considers the importance of the decision not only to the aggrieved parties but also to society as a whole. The Court also considers whether the courts of appeals have decided cases in contradictory ways. The Supreme Court often hears cases to resolve disagreements between various appellate courts

Question 20

To request a Supreme Court hearing

Answer 20

A party files wit the Court a document called a petition for a writ of certiorari. In this petition the party explains why the Supreme Court should consider the case. The justices then consider each petition for writ of certiorari and vote on whether to grant it. For a petition to be granted, four of the nine justices must agree. If the petition for the writ of certiorari is not granted, then the decision of the court of appeals stands

Question 21

If a petition for a writ of certiorari is granted

Answer 21

It does not mean that the party has won the case. The party has only managed to get a full hearing (review) by the Supreme Court. If the petition is granted and the writ is issued, the case proceeds much like an appeal in the appellate courts. The justices consider the lower court transcripts. The attorneys submit legal briefs and present oral arguments to the Court. To prevail before the Supreme Court, a party must have the vote of 5 our of the 9 justices, or a simple majority. (In the event that fewer than 9 justices are hearing the case, it takes a majority to win. Should there be a tie vote, the decision of the court of appeals stands)

Question 22

State Court Systems

Answer 22

Names differ from state to state. For example, general trial courts in California are called superior courts. In New York, trial courts are called supreme courts. In other states, trial courts are known as circuit courts, city courts, county courts, surrogate courts, chancery courts, and courts of common pleas. Many states have additional specialty trial courts such as probate court, juvenile court, and family court. Some states have different levels of trial courts. In addition, many state court systems have a small claims court (the people’s court) in these courts, parties who are suing for small amounts of money go through a simplified litigation process. Attorneys are usually not involved, and all pleadings are extremely simple. These courts are intended to afford speedy legal relief in small cases where normal litigation costs would preclude other actions

Question 23

subject matter jurisdiction

Answer 23

the authority that a court has to hear a particular type of case

Question 24

personal jurisdiction

Answer 24

the power or authority of the court to make a ruling affecting the parties before the court

Question 25

in rem jurisdiction

Answer 25

the authority of a court to hear a case based on the fact that property, which is the subject of a lawsuit, is located within the sate in which the court is situated

Question 26

quasi in rem jurisdiction

Answer 26

authority of a court to hear a case based on the fact that the defendant owns property that is located within the state, even though that property is not the subject of the lawsuit

Question 27

Jurisdiction

Answer 27

Where parties are not residents of the same state or where one party, especially a business, has a presence in several states, determining proper jurisdiction is more involve. The use of the Internet by businesses raises several jurisdiction questions. Two factors are analyzed to determine which court has jurisdiction to hear a case: (1) the type of case (the subject matter of the lawsuit) and (2) the residence of the defendant (or in some cases where the defendant has property). To have jurisdiction to hear a case, a court must have both subject matter jurisdiction , the authority to hear the type of case before the court, and personal jurisdiction, authority or power over the parties, especially the defendant. Sometimes the defendant’s property becomes a substitute for personal jurisdiction. This is referred to as in rem jurisdiction or quasi in rem jurisdiction

Question 28

diversity of citizenship

Answer 28

a basis for federal court subject matter jurisdiction under 28 USC Section 1332 existing when no plaintiff and no defendant are citizens of the same state and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, or when one party is a citizen of a foreign state

Question 29

subject matter jurisdiction of the federal courts

Answer 29

In civil cases, the federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction in the following circumstances:

1. the case involves a constitutional issue;
2. the case involves a treaty;
3. the case involves a federal law, such as those that regulate bankruptcy, patent and copyright, discrimination, or maritime issues;
4. the U.S. government is a plaintiff or defendant in the lawsuit; or
5. the plaintiff and defendant are not citizens of the same state (diversity of citizenship)

Question 30

diversity of citizenship

Answer 30

Complete diversity is not required for certain class action lawsuits. In these cases, if the amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000, the federal courts have jurisdiction if diversity exists between any plaintiff and any defendant. Several special rules apply and the U.S. Code should always be checked (28 U.S.C. Section 1332). One question that sometimes arises in connection with the monetary limit required for diversity jurisdiction is whether several small claims can be aggregated to achieve the minimum requirement. Unfortunately, the answer to this question is not simple and depends on the nature of the claims to be aggregated. In general, however, claims cannot be added together to meet the $75,000 requirement if the claims are separate and distinct

Question 31

exclusive jurisdiction

Answer 31

power or authority to hear a case that belongs to one court system only (i.e., federal or one state court system)

Question 32

concurrent jurisdiction

Answer 32

power or authority of more than one court system to hear a case

Question 33

removal

Answer 33

generally, the transfer of a case from a state court to a federal court where concurrent jurisdiction exists and the case was initially filed in a state court

Question 34

Choice of law

Answer 34

When a federal court exercises jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship, the substantive law controlling the dispute is not found in federal law. If it were, subject matter jurisdiction would be based on that federal law rather than on the diversity of citizenship. When hearing a diversity case, therefore, the federal court must apply some state law to the substantive issues in the case. Usually, but not always, the federal court applies the substantive law of the state in which the federal court is situated

Question 35

supplemental jurisdiction

Answer 35

Also known as pendent or ancillary jurisdiction. A federal court’s right to decide a claim based on a nonfederal issue if this claim depends on the same set of facts as does a federal claim in the case before the court

Question 36

Removal to Federal Court

Answer 36

In cases where concurrent jurisdiction exists, the plaintiff decides where to file the lawsuit. However, if the plaintiff chooses to file in a state court, the defendant usually has the right to have the case transferred or removed to the federal court. The defendant accomplishes this by following the requirements described in the US Code (28 USC Section 1446). After the plaintiff files a complaint in state court, removal occurs as follows:

1. Within 30 days of service or receipt of papers, the defendant files in federal court the following:
   a. a notice of removal (a document requesting that the case be transferred to the federal court) and
   b. copies of all process, pleadings, and orders that the defendant has received
2. The defendant files these documents in the federal district and division located in the state where the plaintiff originally filed the complaint
3. The defendant gives written notice to all adverse parties and the clerk of state court that notice of removal has been filed

Question 37

general jurisdiction

Answer 37

the power or authority of a court to hear cases that are not within the exclusive jurisdiction of a different court

Question 38

multijurisdictional litigation

Answer 38

28 USC Section 1407. Special jurisdictional rules can apply to complex cases where similar cases are filed in more than one U.S. district court. This may occur when a defective product, such as an automobile, results in injuries to numerous victims living in different states. Injured parties often file a lawsuit in the district in which they live, resulting in numerous cases arising out of the same conduct. The law allows these cases to be transferred to one district for the purpose of pretrial proceedings, hoping that the matters will settle. if a case does not settle, the matter is transferred back to the original court for trial

Question 39

limited jurisdiction

Answer 39

authority to hear only certain kinds of cases

Question 40

challenging subject matter jurisdiction

Answer 40

a court that lacks subject matter has no power to decide a case. If it attempts to do so, that judgment is void and can be challenged at any time. Subject matter jurisdiction can be challenged in different ways, depending on where the lawsuit is filed. One common way to attack subject matter jurisdiction is by filing a motion to dismiss the case

Question 41

Jurisdiction over Plaintiff

Answer 41

Personal jurisdiction over the plaintiff seldom, if ever, presents any legal problems. The plaintiffs always file the lawsuit and select the trial court. Therefore, they cannot complain that the court has no power over them. Having asked the court to make a decision concerning their rights, plaintiffs have no basis to challenge the court’s right to do so

Question 42

Jurisdiction over Defendant

Answer 42

No court has unlimited rights to exercise personal jurisdiction. Such a result is basically unfair. All state courts have personal jurisdiction over those who reside within the state. Thus, if a person resides within a state, that person can be sued in any court within that state. Whether a court has jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant depends on 2 factors. First, the exercise of jurisdiction must be in accordance with the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Second, the exercise of jurisdiction must be in accordance with state law

Question 43

Constitutional Limitations

Answer 43

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires “due process of law” in civil as well as criminal cases. In the leading case of “International Shoe Co. v. Washington,” the U.S. Supreme Court held that a state cannot exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant unless that defendant has sufficient contacts with the state to satisfy “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.” Courts can usually exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident if that person or entity is doing business within the state and therefore has the opportunity to avail itself of the state’s laws and state’s courts. The courts refer to this as “purposeful availment.” However, it is not necessary that a defendant is actually conducting an ongoing business within the state. Constitutional requirements are often satisfied with less. In the “International Shoe” case, the Supreme Court found that the state of Washington had personal jurisdiction over a business that hired shoe salesmen within the state and provided them with samples. Occasionally, the company rented rooms to display the shoes. The salesmen took orders that were transmitted to the company’s office out of state. Products were shipped from out of state to Washington addresses. The company had no offices in the state of Washington.

Question 44

long-arm statutes

Answer 44

A state law that defines the right of state courts to exercise jurisdiction over nonresident defendants

Question 45

Web sites jurisdiction

Answer 45

in a series of recent cases, courts were asked to determine questions of personal jurisdiction of parties who maintain Web sites for their businesses. In general, courts find personal jurisdiction where there is some possibility of “interaction” with those visiting the Web site. That is, if a customer can order products through the site, personal jurisdiction probably exists. If the site is informational only, then personal jurisdiction probably will not exist

Question 46

Waiver by Appearance

Answer 46

Although parties to a lawsuit cannot waive, or give up, the requirement of subject matter jurisdiction, a defendant can waive, or give up, the requirement of personal jurisdiction. A waiver of personal jurisdiction means that an individual voluntarily allows a court to hear a case against her even though the court would not otherwise have the power to do so. Furthermore, in some courts, if the defendant makes a general appearance in court and does not properly object to personal jurisdiction, she automatically waives any defect in personal jurisdiction. A defendant makes a general appearance whenever she files a pleading or takes part in the proceedings by doing anything other than objecting to jurisdiction

Question 47

general appearance

Answer 47

either a physical appearance or filing of documents in a court, without specifically limiting the purpose of the appearance; a general appearance confers personal jurisdiction on the court on the party appearing

Question 48

Notice

Answer 48

Fairness demands that before a court can decide the rights of a defendant in a lawsuit, the defendant should be given proper notice of the action. This is known as “service of process.”

Question 49

special appearance

Answer 49

An appearance in court (either in person or by filing documents) for a limited purpose, often contesting jurisdiction

Question 50

motion to quash service of summons

Answer 50

A request that the court declare that service of the complaint and summons is invalid either because the court lacks jurisdiction over the defendant or because of some procedural problem with the service itself

Question 51

challenging personal jurisdiction

Answer 51

A defendant must exercise care in challenging personal jurisdiction because doing so in an improper manner may inadvertently confer personal jurisdiction on the court. Although federal courts allow defendants to challenge personal jurisdiction in the answer to the complaint, in some courts personal jurisdiction must be attacked by “special appearance” (an appearance for the sole purpose of questioning the court’s jurisdiction). This is often done by filing a motion to quash service of summons. A “motion to quash service of summons” is a request that the court invalidate any service of the complaint and summons, thereby preventing the plaintiff from pursuing her lawsuit. In federal court, a motion to quash service of summons is an alternative way of challenging peronal jurisdiction

Question 52

In Rem Jurisdiction

Answer 52

Sometimes, even though personal jurisdiction may be questionable or even nonexistent, the court can hear a case if it has jurisdiction over property that is the subject of a dispute. This is known as “in rem jurisdiction” and is a substitute in some cases for personal jurisdiction

Question 53

Quasi in Rem Jurisdiction

Answer 53

Another substitute for personal jurisdiction is quasi in rem jurisdiction. For quasi in rem jurisdiction to exist, various requirements must be met. First, a defendant must own some property within the state, although the property need not be the subject of the lawsuit. Second, any judgment is limited to the value of the property within the state. Third, that property is usually brought before the court at the beginning of the lawsuit through an attachment proceeding. In an attachment proceeding, the court usually orders that the property be seized and remain under the control of the court until the case is resolved. If a court hears a case based on in rem or quasi in rem jurisdiction, due process still requires that the exercise of jurisdiction be fair and that the defendant be notified of the lawsuit. Notice is accomplished through service of process under the laws of the state in which the action is pending.

Question 54

venue

Answer 54

An analysis of subject matter jurisdiction tells a plaintiff whether to file an action in federal court or state court. An analysis of personal jurisdiction tells a plaintiff in which state or states to file. Personal jurisdiction is statewide. Choosing the court in the proper geographical area of the state is a question of venue. Lawsuits should be filed and heard in a court that has proper venue. However, unlike jurisdiction, a court’s lack of proper venue does not render a judgment void. If a defendant does not object to improper venue, she waives the right to object to the judgment rendered by the court

Question 55

federal court venue

Answer 55

The general venue statute for federal courts is 28 U.S.C. Section 1391, but several different statutes control specific situations. The general statute provides 2 locations for proper venue and further provides that these locations are proper for cases based on diversity of citizenship or for cases not based on diversity:

1. the judicial district where any defendant resides, as long as all of the defendants reside in the same state, or
2. the judicial district where the acts that form the basis of the lawsuit occurred

Where there are multiple defendants in a case, sometimes neither of these locations is possible.

If the action cannot be brought in any district meeting, these criteria (i.e., if all defendants don’t reside in the same state or if the lawsuit arose from acts that took place in a location that no longer has personal jurisdiction 28 U.S.C. Section 1391 provides an alternative venue: “If there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.”

Generally, when the U.S. government is the defendant in a lawsuit, venue is proper in the judicial district where the plaintiff resides (28 U.S.C. Section 1402). Special rules also apply to some complex litigation matters where similar cases have been brought in different courts. The code (28 U.S.C. Section 1407) gives a special judicial panel on multidistrict litigation the power to make orders regarding venue for pretrial proceedings for the convenience of witnesses and interests of justice. Sometimes, a statute that creates substantive rights also provides for venue. For example, the U.S. Code provides that employment discrimination lawsuits can be brought.

“in any judicial district in the state in which the unlawful employment practice is alleged to have been committed, in the judicial district in which the employment records relevant to such practice are maintained and administered, or in the judicial district in which the aggrieved person would have worked but for the alleged unlawful employment practice, but if the respondent is not found within any such district, such an action may be brought within the judicial district in which the respondent has his principal office (42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-5(f)(3)

Question 56

Changing venue

Answer 56

To change venue, a party makes a formal written request of the court where the lawsuit was filed. This is done by making a “motion for change of venue.” However, a court must have good reason before it considers transferring the case to another location. Some of the more common reasons include the fact that in the original location the parties cannot get a fair trial, or the case was not filed in the proper court to begin with. A case might also be transferred for the convenience of the witness