Civ Pro

Question 1

Standard of judging if you can hold a D liable for PJ in a specific state?

Answer 1

Needs to be fair and reasonable to hold D accountable to a certain state if its’ activities there are limited and the cause of action didn’t happen there.

Question 2

In deciding whether to grant a motion for summary judgment,

Answer 2

In deciding whether to grant a motion for summary judgment, the court must determine whether a genuine issue of material fact exists.

Question 3

In general, a Summary judgment must be granted if,

Answer 3

In general, a summary judgment must be granted if, from the pleadings, affidavits, and discovery materials, it appears that there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Question 4

How does a motion for summary judgment work?

Answer 4

If the moving party submits an affidavit or other evidence in support of the MSJ, the nonmoving party must counter that affidavit with his own evidence from affidavits, discovery, etc, on the matter.

Question 5

For claim preclusion to apply: (3) elements

Answer 5

For claim preclusion to apply, there must have been (1) a valid, final judgment on the merits, (2) BOTH parties must be the same (or be in privity with a party in the prior suit), and (3) the new action must involve the same cause of action, meaning that all of the claims must arise out of the same transaction or occurrence.

Question 6

For issue preclusion to apply: 4 elements

Answer 6

For issue preclusion to apply, (1) the issues in both actions must be the same, (2) there must have been a final judgment as to that issue, (3) the party against whom collateral estoppel is asserted must have had a fair opportunity to be heard on the matter and (4) the posture of the case must be such that it would not be unfair or inequitable to apply collateral estoppel.

Question 7

1. What is the scope of discovery? and
2. How does work product figure into that?

Answer 7

• Discovery may be had of any matter not privileged that is relevant to the claim or defense of any party, including the identity of the person having knowledge of relevant facts.
• The costs of discovery and needs of the case also will be considered.
• However, work product of lawyers and others prepared in anticipation of litigation is discoverable only on a showing of substantial need and to avoid undue hardship in obtaining the material from other sources.

Question 8

What happens if a document has information that is not relevant to the case?

Answer 8

If a document has information that is not relevant to the case, the court will likely make an in camera inspection of the file and redact out any information that is irrelevant to the current litigation.

Question 9

Removal: procedure

Answer 9

The party moving for removal must file a notice of removal with the federal District Court and send a copy of the notice to all other parties and the state court. The notice must be filed within 30 days after the defendant obtains a copy of the complaint and it must contain the grounds for removal. - if the ground for removal is that diversity exists the action can’t be removed from state court after one year has passed since filing unless the plaintiff acted in bad faith to prevent removal. All defendants properly join to the action must join in the removal.

Question 10

Permissive joinder

Answer 10

Under rule 20 parties may be joined as plaintiffs or joined as defendants whenever: 1. Some claim is made by each plaintiff and against each defendant relating to or arising out of the same series of occurrences, and 2. There is a question of law or fact common to all the parties

Question 11

SMJ

Answer 11

For a federal court to have subject matter jurisdiction over the case it must either have federal question jurisdiction or diversity jurisdiction. For federal question jurisdiction to be present the claim mustard rise under the US Constitution or federal laws or treaties. For diversity jurisdiction to be present there must be complete diversity of citizenship amongst the parties and the amount and controversy must exceed $75,000.

Question 12

Supplemental jurisdiction

Answer 12

Supplemental jurisdiction allows a court to hear claims that fall outside of its original jurisdiction if the supplemental claim arises from the same nucleus of operative fact (same T/O) as the claim that invoked the original federal subject matter jurisdiction.

Question 13

Restrictions on the use of supplemental jurisdiction: diversity cases

Answer 13

The addition of a plaintiff by means of supplemental jurisdiction cannot destroy diversity Claims by compulsorly joined plaintiffs or by plainta seeking to intervene may not be heard under the court’s supplemental jurisdiction

Question 14

Appeals

Answer 14

In determining whether it can immediately appeal a court order, the party must consider whether the order is final or whether an exception to this final order rule applies. Generally, only a final order is appealable.  An order is not final if it disposes of fewer than all of the claims or parties. A final order disposes of the whole case. 

Question 15

Appeals: final order exceptions

Answer 15

Where multiple claims or multiple parties are involved in an action, the Courtney enter a final judgment as to fewer than all of the claims or parties on: 1. And express determination that there is no just reason for delay, and 2. A direction for the entry of judgment

Question 16

Collateral order doctrine

Answer 16

If the claim or issue is separable from in collateral to the main suit and is too important to require deferring appellate review, it may be classified as a judgment in a separate (“collateral”) proceeding and thus be appealable.

Question 17

Writs of mandamus and prohibition

Answer 17

An exceptional cases, circumvention of the final judgment rule through the appellate writs of mandamus and prohibition is allowed. Mandamus commands a trial judge to act and prohibition commands the trial judge to refrain from acting. The writs are only available if an appeal will be insufficient to correct a problem in the trial court’s actions constitute a serious abusive power that must be immediately corrected.

Question 18

issue preclusion [3 elements]

ADAPTIBAR RULE

Answer 18

IP prevents a party from relitigating the same issue in a subsequent suit if:

1. the judgment in the 1st action was a valid, final judgment on the merits
2. the issue was actually litigated
3. the issue was essential to the judgment

Question 19

non-mutual collateral estoppel [defensive and offensive]

Answer 19

In certain situations, non-parties may invoke issue preclusion against a party from the 1st lawsuit.

Defensive non-mutual collateral estoppel refers to someone who was not present in the 1st lawsuit using the 1st judgment to avoid liability in the 2nd lawsuit and is only permitted if the precluded party had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue in the 1st lawsuit.

Offensive non-mutual collateral estoppel refers to someone who wasn’t present in the 1st lawsuit using the 1st judgment to obtain relief against someone who was a party in the 1st suit; it is rare and permitted in some circumstances.

Question 20

Federal courts are courts of ______ jurisdiction.

For a federal court to have SMJ it must have been granted SMJ by _____.

Answer 20

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction.

For a federal court to have SMJ it must have been granted SMJ by statute.

Question 21

For FQ jurisdiction to be proper the case must arise under the??

Answer 21

For FQ jurisdiction to be proper the case must arise under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the US.

• Jurisdiction is denied, however, if an alien who has been admitted to permanent residence in the US is domiciled in the same state as an adverse party.

Question 22

When will federal courts not take jurisdiction over actions?

Answer 22

Generally, federal courts will not take jurisdiction over actions involving the issuance of a divorce decree, alimony, or a child custody decree.

• The exception is very narrow- the case must relate to the issuance of such a decree.

Question 23

Whem must a JMOL be made?

Answer 23

Under the federal rules, a judgment as a matter of law must be made at some point during the trial.

Question 24

A party is limited to what grounds in the JMOL?

Answer 24

A party is also limited to the grounds raised in the initial JMOL.

(You can’t renew an objection to something you didn’t originally make in the first place, so a renewed JMOL can only be based on things you already brought up in the original JMOL).

• The party must also make the renewed motion for JMOL within 28 days of judgment.

Question 25

What does the court need to find to grant a motion or renewed motion for JMOL?

Answer 25

To grant a motion for JMOL or a renewed motion for JMOL the court must find that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient basis to find for the party on the issue.

• The court must view the evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party and without considering the credibility of witnesses.

Question 26

When may a new trial be granted?

Answer 26

Generally, a new trial may be granted because of some serious errors that occurred during the trial (like error in admitting evidence, error in jury instructions, verdict is excessive etc).

• In theory, a new trial could be granted if the jury’s verdict represents a serious error of judgment, but the judge may not replace the jury verdict with the verdict he would have reached.

Question 27

Parties can be joined as Defendants whenever

Answer 27

Under the Federal Rules, parties may be joined as D’s whenever (

1) some claim is made by each P and against each D relating to or arising out of the same series or occurrences or transactions; and
(2) there is a question of fact or law common to all of the parties.

The policy is to permit adjudication of all claims arising out of a single transaction.

Question 28

Can the trial court dictate the order of the evidence at trial?

Answer 28

After the pre-trial conference, the court issues in order that controls the subsequent course of events in the case, including issues needing resolution in the order in which they are presented to the jury. (So, yes)

Question 29

May a judge grant a judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) after party has been fully heard on an issue but before they have finished presenting their case?

Answer 29

A party may move for judgment as a matter of law at any time before the submission of the case to the jury. It may be granted only after the nonmoving party has been fully heard regarding issues and claims, and the court concludes that there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to conclude in favor of the non-moving party.

Question 30

What is the standard for granting judgment as a matter of law?

Answer 30

A motion for judgment as a matter of law maybe granted when evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, is such that reasonable persons could only come to one conclusion.