Civ Pro Flashcards
Subject-matter Jurisdiction
Federal courts have limited SMJ (power over claims).
Invoked through:
- original filing (federal question, diversity, supplemental jurisdiction)
- removal by defendant
**Cannot be waived and can be raised at any time
1331 Jurisdiction - Definition
Cases “arising” under Federal law (no jurisdictional amount requirement). In other words, must be created by federal, constitutional, statutory, or treaty law.
1331 Jurisdiction - Requirements
“Well-pleaded” Complaint: federal issues present on face of complaint and not raised in defendant’s answer or based on what plaintiff anticipate defendant will assert.
1332 Jurisdiction - Requirements
- complete diversity between parties (each plaintiff from different state than each defendant)
- AIC exceeds $75k
Determining Citizenship of Parties
Look at Domicile:
A person can only have one domicile. A corporation and non-corporate entity can have multiple domiciles.
Domicile Requirements - Person
- physical presence in that state
- intent to remain indefinitely (foreseeable future)
A person’s old domicile (where born or, if changed, that place) is presumed to be domicile unless rebut by preponderance of the evidence that requirements met for a new place.
Domicile Factors - Person
- residence
- registered to vote
- own / rent home
- time in new place
- job
- license / registration
*statements alone insufficient
Domicile Requirements - Corporation
- state(s) in which incorporated
- state in which PPOB
Principal Place of Business
Hertz Nerve Center Test:
- where corporation’s high-level officers direct, control, and coordinate the corporation’s activities (usually the headquarters).
Domicile Requirements - Non-Corporate Entity
Citizenship of members (titles are irrelevant as well as place where organized).
Diversity - Noncitizens
Diversity exists between U.S. citizen and
(1) citizen of foreign country,
(2) foreign citizen who is lawful permanent resident and domiciled in different state, and
(3) foreign nation
Jurisdictional Amount - Requirements
Complaint must assert, in good faith, that jurisdictional amount exceeds $75k, excluding interest and costs. ULTIMATE REWARD IRRELEVANT.
Measured at time case is filed.
Jurisdictional Amount - Aggregating Claims
Claims by multiple plaintiffs or against multiple defendants CANNOT be aggregated UNLESS:
- plaintiffs share a common or undivided interest
- single plaintiff with two or more claims against single defendant OR
- multiple defendants who may be jointly and severally liable
Jurisdictional Amount - Class Action
At least one representative plaintiff has claim in excess of 75k (plaintiffs with lesser claims can be joined under supplemental jurisdiction doctrine)
Waiver of Service - Defendant Lacks Good Cause to Refuse
- Defendant must reimburse Plaintiff for costs of service charged by private process server
- Defendant must pay reasonable attorneys’ fees for preparing the motion for costs
- Defendant must reimburse Plaintiff for court costs of filing fee for filing the motion
Supplemental Jurisdiction - Requirements
exists over supplemental claim if original claim and supplemental claim arose out same transaction or occurrence (common nucleus of operative fact)
Supplemental Jurisdiction - Concerns
No plaintiff can bring supplemental claim that would destroy complete diversity.
Defendant can bring supplemental claim even if it destroys complete diversity.
Existing plaintiffs who brought diversity claim against defendant cannot later add a non-diverse state claim against new defendants.
Factors to Decline Supplemental Jurisdiction
Even where requirements met, can decline (discretionary) if:
- novel / complex issue of state law
- supplemental claim “substantially predominates” over original claim
- original claim has been dismissed
Dismissal Based on Jurisdictional Amount
Defendant must demonstrate clear to a legal certainty that plaintiff cannot be awarded an amount in excess of $75k.
Requirements for Removal
- plaintiff could have filed claim in federal court
- all defendants join in or consent to removal AND
- defendant removes case within 30 days of receipt of plaintiff’s complaint
Dismissal Based on Diversity of Citizenship
parties only need to be diverse on day of filing. So, can only dismiss if diversity was incomplete before filing.
Removal: Forum Citizen Defect Rule
If Defendant relies on 1332 SMJ as basis for removal and ANY defendant is citizen of forum state, presence of D creates a defect that makes removal improper.
Removal Concerns
- forum-defendant rule
- diversity of citizenship must exist at time of filing AND when defendant files NoR
- court must have SMJ over all claims
- if based on federal question, non-removable claim must be severed and remanded
Steps for Removal
All parties who have been properly joined and served must join / consent in removal b signing notice of removal or providing written consent.
- D files notice in federal court that encompasses location where state court pending.
- When multiple Ds, each has 30 days to file NoR, starting from date each D received fromal service of state court complaint / summons.
- Ds provided “short and plain statement” of the SMJ that provides grounds for removal, including facts concerning basis for original SMJ
- Ds sign notice and attach copy of all state court process, pleadings, and orders
- Ds file NoR and attachments in federal court and serve on P with memo explaining reasons for removal.
- Ds take NoR, attachments, and copy of memo and file in state court (effectuates removal).
Timing of removal
If removable when served, within 30 days of service (based on service of each defendant so earlier-served defendants can consent to removal by later-served defendant).
If originally non-removable but then becomes removable, 30 days from date each defendant received “paper” showing case removable.
Bad Faith of Plaintiff Excusing Untimely Removal
- failure to describe seriousness of injuries in complaint
- intentional delay in serving Defendant
- vague answers to interrogatories / damages request
- delaying medical records
- requesting numerous extensions
Fraudulent Joinder - Definition
enables a Defendant to remove / remand if demonstrate Plaintiff sued party which they have no means of recovering against for the purpose of obtaining or destroying complete diversity
Fraudulent Joinder - Requirements
Defendant must show, after removal, that no reasonable possibility for Plaintiff to recover against the fraudulently joined Defendant.
Reasonable possibility = same standard for MSJ
Personal Jurisdiction - Types
- in personam
- in rem
- quasi in rem
Caterpillar Rule
Remand not available for defect in 1332 SMJ when:
1. lack of complete diversity existed when NoR filed;
2. federal court did not recognize defect and remand; and
3. lack of complete diversity remedied later so that defect did not exist when trial began.
Substantive Defect in Removal: Lack of SMJ
No statutory limit because lack of SMJ can be raised by any party (or the court) at any time.
EXCEPTIONS: Caterpillar rule; fraudulent joinder doctrine
Procedural Defect in Removal Procedure: Motion to Remand
If plaintiff believes procedural defect, must file motion to remand within 30 days of date when NoR initially filed. Otherwise WAIVED
In Personam Jurisdiction
exists if statutory basis and exercise of jurisdiction meets constitutional requirements of due process
Personal Jurisdiction - Definition
power over the person or property
A defendant’s express or implied consent (e.g., filing answer without objecting to PJ) operates as waiver.
Timing of Removal: 1 Year Past Filing Rule
Cannot remove suit on basis of 1332 jurisdiction after one year from filing date, even if suit does not become removable until later.
EXCEPTION: Plaintiff acted in bad faith to prevent removal.
In Personam - Statutory Basis
- defendant falls within any one of criteria set forth in long-arm statute of forum state OR
- state allows exercise of PJ over parties to maximum extent allowed by Constitution
In Personam Jurisdiction - Constitutional Requirements
Court can constitutionally exercise general, transient, or specific jurisdiction.
General Jurisdiction
contacts with the forum state must be so “continuous” and “systematic” as to render the defendant essentially “at home” in the forum. If constant and pervasive contacts = GPJ; if only casual and isolated = no GPJ.
Paradigm general personal jurisdiction = DOMICILE
Transient Jurisdiction
Nonresident individual is PERSONALLY SERVED with process while temporarily and VOLUNTARILY in the forum state
Specific Jurisdiction - Requirements
- defendant’s in-forum activities or contacts give rise to the cause of action
- defendant has minimum contacts with the forum
- exercise of jurisdiction is supported by the due process standard of reasonableness
Specific Jurisdiction - Minimum Contacts (Person)
more than de minimis. Contacts must have been (1) purposefully undertaken by the defendant (2) such that it is foreseeable that the defendant could be sued there.
Specific Jurisdiction - Minimum Contacts (Business Entity)
S.C. has not agreed on approach.
Stream of Commerce: defendant purposefully placed product in stream of commerce with expectation that will be purchased by consumers in forum state
Stream of Commerce Plus: in addition to purposefully placing … defendant took specific action to make that product marketable in the forum state
Specific Jurisdiction - Minimum Contacts (E-Commerce)
If product reached forum through e-commerce, three factors to see if purposefully created contact:
- level of interactivity on defendant’s website
- extent of “hits” on that website by users located in the forum
- extent of commercial activity conducted by defendant in forum state
Specific Jurisdiction - Due Process
Must not violate traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
FACTORS:
- plaintiff’s interest in having suit heard by chosen forum
- forum’s interest in providing forum for dispute
- burden on defendant in having case heard in chosen forum
- interstate judicial system’s interest in obtaining the most efficient resolution of disputes and in furthering substantive social policies
In Rem
do not impact defendants personally but rather determines rights to specific property.
Court can settle claims from ALL possible claimants involving real or personal property within forum state.
Quasi In Rem - Applicable Proceedings
- plaintiff seeking to secure preexisting claim in property (like enforce lien)
- plaintiff seeking to use defendant’s property to satisfy judgment
Quasi In Rem: Requirements
Defendant has minimum contacts with forum such that fair to make defendant defend action in forum.
Service of Process - Requirements
Must comply with statutory and constitutional requirements
Service of Process - Statutory Requirements
INDIVIDUAL: made by serving
- Defendant personally
- someone of suitable age and discretion who resides in defendant’s dwelling
- defendant’s agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service
CORPORATION: serving officer, managing agent, or agent authorized by appointment or law to receive service
OUTSIDE U.S.: complying with internationally agreed-upon means of service reasonably calculated to give notice
Service of Process - Constitutional Requirements
made in a manner reasonably calculated under all circumstances to apprise parties and to afford them opportunity to be heard, with due regard for practicalities of the individual case
Waiver of Service
Defendant agrees to waiver + Plaintiff’s request was:
- made through written notice
- names court where suit filed
- contains copy of complaint
- informs defendant of consequences of declining request
- gives defendant at least 30 days after request or 60 days if outside US to return waiver
- sent by first-class mail or other reliable means
Timely Service
Within 90 days after complaint filed
Proper Venue
- RESIDENTIAL: where one defendant resides (if only defendant) or where all reside (if all defendants live in same state)
- EVENT: where substantial part of act / omission giving rise to claim occurred or where substantial part of property that is subject that is subject of action is located; OR
- FALLBACK PROVISION: if NEITHER of the above is met, federal district in which any defendant subject to personal jurisdiction
Residential Venue for Alien
Any federal district in the US
Remedies for Improper Venue
- motion to dismiss
- transfer to proper venue
IF DO NOT RAISE IT, WAIVED
Transfer of Venue
Can transfer claim to:
- any other district to which all parties consented OR
- to district where all defendants subject to PJ and venue would lie
Transfer of Venue - Choice of Law
if venue was proper pre-transfer, receiving court applies law that transferring court would have applied.
If venue was improper pre-transfer, receiving court makes its own independent COL analysis.
Transfer of Venue under Sec. 1404(a) - Proper Venue
For convenience of parties and in interest of justice, federal court can transfer civil action to federal court with proper venue to:
- any federal district where action might have been brought OR
- any federal district to which all parties consented
Transfer of Venue under Sec. 1406 - Improper Venue
When venue improper in that federal court:
- federal court can grant motion to dismiss for improper venue;
- if in interest of justice, transfer to any federal district where case could have been brought; or
- if defendants waive, federal court can proceed
Transfer of Venue - Forum Non Conveniens
In determining whether to grant a MTD on this ground, FACTORS:
- location of potential witnesses, relevant evidence, and records
- possible undue hardship for defendant
- availability of adequate alternative forums for plaintiff
- choice of law applicable to dispute
- questions of public policy
Choice of Law - State v. Federal Claims
If federal claim, no COL problem.
If state claim, COL problem.
Choice of Law - Erie Doctrine
When adjudicating state law claims, federal court should apply:
- federal procedural law
- state substantive law if no valid and controlling federal statute, provision of Constitution, or provision of treaty that governs issue.
Choice of Law - Substantive v. Procedural
Outcome- Determinative Test:
- analyze whether issue is outcome-determinative (substantially affects outcome) AND
- balance interests underlying state law and conflicting federal practice / custom to determine if it favors application of state law (discourage forum shopping, avoid inequitable administration of laws)
Choice of Law - Multiple State Substantive law
Federal court will apply COL state where court located unless transferred from proper venue (COL rules of original state).
if initial venue correct but transferred because of forum selection clause, apply COL rules of state in which it sits
Choice of Law - Federal Common Law
if strong federal interest, constitutional limitation on federal judicial authority to create federal common law to adjudicate state law claims does not apply.
Strong federal interest = state law impacts federal party or implicates nation’s foreign relations or federal interest in maintaining uniformity when dealing with US currency and commercial paper
Pretrial Remedies - Types
- preliminary injunction
- temporary restraining order
Preliminary Injunction
Granted if:
- nonmovant received notice
- movant shows likelihood of success on merits
- movant established nonmovant’s conduct is likely to cause irreparable harm or render final judgment on merits ineffectual
- balance of equities tips in favor of movant (irreparable harm > inconvenience to nonmovant)
- injunction in public’s interest
