Civ Pro Flashcards

Question

Personal Jurisdiction: Fairness

Answer 1

Exercising PJ over the D MUST comply with traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.

Answer 2

1. Burden on the D; 2. Interests of the forum state in the litigation; 3. Interest of the P in litigating the matter in that state; 4. Interstate efficiency; and 5. interstate policy interests. --> NOT SUFFICIENT by themselves to sustain a finding of personal jurisdiction.

Answer 3

A judgment that binds the entire world as to the future disposition of PROPERTY ONLY · NOT the individuals parties to the suit · Includes anyone who MAY have an interest in the land · K so long as property is located in jurisdiction AND NOT BROUGHT THERE BY FRAUD OR TRICK.

Answer 4

If named property is w/in jurisdiction, court can hear EVEN IF the court does NOT have in personam jurisdiction. · Only adjudicates the rights to the named property as b/w the parties to the suit --> NOT as against the entire world

Answer 5

1. Type 1: COA and Property relate 2. Type 2: P may sue on a personal claim AND ATTACH the property to satisfy his claim against the property's owner EVEN IF the P's claim is UNRELATED to the property. --> MUST STISFY the minimum contacts test from International Shoe --> Ownership of the property in the forum state is NOT ENOUGH to satisfy test

Answer 6

The power of FEDERAL courts to hear certain kinds of cases OR to exercise authority over certain kinds of disputes. · If at ANY POINT during the case, a federal court finds that it LACKS SMJ, it MUST DISMISS the case. · While Congress CANNOT EXPAND SMJ, they can make it narrower.

Answer 7

Federal district courts shall have jurisdiction over civil actions b/w citizens of different states where the amount in controversy exceeds the sum of $75k. · COMPLETE DIVERSITY is required by SCOTUS

Answer 8

Satisfied when one P is a citizen of a different state than at least one D. · AKA K Diversity

Answer 9

NO P can be a citizen of the same state as ANY D. · Does NOT matter if Ps or Ds have same citizenship but Ps CANNOT share citizenship with ANY D.

Answer 10

The date the LAWSUIT IS COMMENCED. · NOT the date on which whatever even gave rise to the lawsuit actually occurred. · ALTHOUGH if a party is added to the case DURING LITIGATION that destroys diversity, the court MUST DISMISS the case or otherwise give it up.

Answer 11

The P MUST actually sue the D for an amount GREATER than $75k EVEN IF P ultimately recovers less than that or nothing at all. · P is taken at his word AS LONG AS the P claimed the amount IN GOOD FAITH UNLESS it appears to a LEGAL CERTAINTY from the FACE OF THE COMPLAINT that there is NO WAY P can possibly recover more than $75k.

Answer 12

Where a P bring multiple claims against a SINGLE D, the amt-in-controversy requirement is met when ALL THE CLAIMS add up to an amount GREATER than $75k · Can arise from the same incident · Every claim MUST be based on distinct HARMS OR LOSSES · Must NOT have alternative theories of liability

Answer 13

Where a single P sues multiple Ds in a single suit, he CANNOT add the claims against the Ds in order to reach an amount great than $75k · MUST be met w/ EACH D

Answer 14

Depends on if the entity is a PERSON OR CORPORATION.

Answer 15

Where they are DOMICILED, not where residences are located.

Answer 16

REQUIRES the convergence of TWO basic elements: (1) Objective physical PRESENCE in the state; AND (2) Subjective INTENTION by the party to remain there INDEFINITELY. --> Courts usually look to facts and circumstances in order to ascertain.

Answer 17

(1) The state where it was INCORPORATED; OR (2) The state where it has its PRINCIPLE PLACE OF BUSINESS.

Answer 18

A corporations PPB consisted of the place where the corporation's officers DIRECT, CONTROL and CORRDINATE the corporation's activities. · HQ provided that the HQs is the ACTUAL center of control and not simply an officer where board meetings are held.

Answer 19

Fed. ct. has SMJ over disputes b/w a citizen of any US state AND an alien. · UNTIL the alien has been admitted to the US for permanent residence AND is domiciled. - Same state as the US citizen-opponent = DENIED

Answer 20

No fed. jurisdiction over an action by an alien again an alien · BUT MAY appear as additional parties AS LONG AS there are citizens of the US on BOTH SIDES.

Answer 21

The citizenship of a partnership, general or limited, is that of EACH AND EVERY PARTNER.

Answer 22

Treated like an UNINCORPORATED association for citizenship purposes.

Answer 23

Considered a citizen of EACH STATE of which ANY MEMBER is a citizen.

Answer 24

Legal rep of the estate of a descendent, an infant, or incompetent --> Deemed to have the same citizenship as whom they rep.

Answer 25

Diversity is determined on the basis of the citizenship of the NAMED MEMBERS of the class who are suing. · Can be overcome by carefully selecting named members · OR P can change state PRIOR to commencement of the suit AS LONG AS genuine and NOT temporary.

Answer 26

Court MAY realign the designation of the parties to create OR destroy diversity according to the parties true intentions with the suit.

Answer 27

A court MAY entertain claims that (by themselves) do NOT meet the requirements of FQ or diversity jurisdiction IF the claims arise from a COMMON NUCLEAUS OF OPERATIVE FACT as the claim that invoked original federal SMJ.

Answer 28

NO supplemental jurisdiction for claims by original Ps against intervening Ds · OR claims by intervening Ps WHEN INTERVENTION IS AS OF RIGHT. · MAY proceed ONLY IF there is an independent basis for SMJ

Answer 29

→ Substituted = Citizenship of the substitution party is DISREGARDED. → Replaced = Wrong party was replaced w/ correct party = REPLACEMENT party's citizenship

Answer 30

Impleader = 3P → NO diversity of amt. on controversy is required UNLESS the original P asserts a claim against the 3PD

Answer 31

If the STOC, does NOT need to meet the requirements of diversity of citizenship OR FQ.

Answer 32

→ D's counterclaim CANNOT be combined w/ Ps claims to reach the 75k → compulsory counterclaim does NOT need to meet the 75k

Answer 33

· Collateral consequences may NOT be considered; · Attorneys' fees that are recoverable by K OR by statute MAY be considered; · Interest that is related to the claim itself CAN be considered; AND/OR · Punitive damages PERMITTED UNDER STATE substantive law MAY be used.

Answer 34

P files in state court for amt. less than 75k requirement and D counters w/ suit more than 75k CANNOT be removed to fed. court → Removal only permitted by D b/c P 1st to file. · PLEASE NOTE MODERN TREND to allow removal to federal court by P.

Answer 35

A federal court in a diversity case WILL apply its own PROCEDURAL law → BUT MUST APPLY the substantive law of the STATE in which it is sitting.

Answer 36

Whether there is a FEDERAL LAW for the specific issue → YES? It applies provided it is VALID → NO? Apply to test to find out if issue is substantive OR procedural.

Answer 37

1) Outcome Determinative Test; 2) Balance of Interest Test; OR 3) Forum shopping deterrence?

Answer 38

1) SOL; 2) Rules for tolling SOL; and/or 3) Choice of law rules.

Answer 39

Fed. Ct. will apply the STATE SUBSTANTIVELY and FED. PROCEDURAL.

Answer 40

Fed. Ct. is bound to apply substantive law that would be applied by HIGHEST COURT OF THE STATE. → Fed. trial ct. reviewed DE NOVO by appellate. → UNTIL FINAL APPEAL, trial court decision MAY BE CHANGED to conform to a new decision.

Answer 41

For damages against FEDERAL officials for violating K rights.

Answer 42

Federal cts. GENERALLY will not exercise diversity jurisdiction over domestic relations OR probate proceedings.

Answer 43

Applies to accidents in which AT LEAST 75 pp have died from a SINGLE ACCIDENT at a discrete location. → ONLY 1 P MUST be diverse from ONLY 1 D. → Intervention permitted.

Answer 44

Only requires 1 P diverse from 1 D AND ONE OTHER FROM THE FOLLOWING: · 1 D MUST reside in a different state from the place where a substantial party of the accident took place; · Any 2 Ds MUST reside in different states; OR · Substantial parts of the accident MUST have taken place in different states.

Answer 45

Original jurisdiction over ALL civil actions arising under K law.

Answer 46

· FQ MUST appear as part of the P's cause of action (COA) as set out in a WELL-PLEADED COMPLAINT. · Defense based on federal law WILL NOT create FQ. · NO amt. in controversy requirement. · Can be IMPLIED federal right of action → T4: NOT ESSENTIAL that the federal statute expressly provide for a civil COA for a violation.

Answer 47

FQ does NOT arise merely from a corporate party incorporated by an act of Congress UNELSS the US owns MORE THAN 50% of the corporation's stock.

Answer 48

DISCRETIONARY supplemental jurisdiction over STATE CLAIMS if the claims derive from a CNOOF (common nucleus of operative facts.

Answer 49

Can arise from the CNOOF.

Answer 50

Cases involving: 1) Bankruptcy; 2) Patent & copyright; 3) Involving US 4) Involving foreign states removed from state courts to federal courts; 5) USPS; 6) IRS; and/or 7) Security Exchange Act.

Answer 51

Art.3, §2, Clause 1 → Establishes FQJ

Answer 52

1) FQ is a SUBTANTIAL ONE (serious dispute); 2) FQ is serious and important enough to warrant pursuing the claim in federal ct.; AND 3) Are fed. cts. OVERWHELMED w/ a workload BEYOND what Congress INTENDED

Answer 53

Relates to the proper district in which to bring the action. → Question of geography rather than power of authority → MAY be WAIVED; OR → MAY be TRANSFERRED by Court for convenience or by parties if all agree.

Answer 54

Venue in the fed. cts. is proper in: · Judicial district (JD) where ANY D resides IF all Ds reside in the same state; · JD where a substantial party of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred OR a substantial party of the property subject to the action; OR · JD where ANY D is subject to PJ w/ respect to the action.

Answer 55

Resides in the JD in which he is DOMICILED. → INCLUDES an alien LAWFULLY admitted for permanent residence.

Answer 56

Any JD in which it is subject to the court's PJ w/ respect to the action in question.

Answer 57

May be sued in any JD. → Disregarded when joinder w/ respect to other Ds.

Answer 58

Court MUST DISMISS OR TRANSFERRED to the proper venue in the interests of justice. · Transfer is MORE appropriate UNLESS EXTRAORDINARY circumstances.

Answer 59

Was original venue proper? → YES = Apply law of the venue to which the case was originally assigned. → NO = Apply law of the venue to which the case shall be transferred.