Civ Pro - Revised Flashcards
Bases for personal jurisdiction (generally); general overarching concern
Traditional and Modern; fairness to defendant
Traditional (general) basis for personal jurisdiction
Consent, domicile, or present in state when served.
Modern (specific) basis for jurisdiction
minimum contacts stndard if there is a long-arm statute, and jurisdiction is conistent with constitution
California long arm statute
State courts have power over
any person or property up to limits of constitution
Standard for defendant’s contacts to establish jurisdiction
Defendant must have sufficient minimum contacts with forum state such that asserting jurisdiction over him does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Look at minimum contacts, relateness of claim to contact with forum, fairness factors.
scope of federal subject matter jurisdiction
Federal Questions, or Diversity of Citizenship
Requirements for SMJ under diversity
citizens from different states, amount in controversy exceeds $75,000
Complete diversity requirement
No plaintiff may be a citizen of the same state as any defendant at the time the action is commenced.
75000 Threshold
amount in controversy must EXCEED 75k to establish diversity jurisdiction.
California state court SMJ
California has general SMJ over any case not within exclusive jurisdiction of another court.
Classifications of civil cases
Unlimited: Superior court, amount in controversy exceeds $25,000.
Limited: Superior court, amount in controversy $25,000 or less. Limitations placed on use of process. Claimant cannot recover more than $25k.
Dmall claims: Small claims court. Individual plaintiff: claim of 10k or less. Business entity: 5k or less.
Supplemental jurisdiction
Extends SMJ to include causes of action that wouldn’t qualify for jurisdiction on their own, but additional claim shares common nucleus of operative fact. With a claim that does invoke jurisdiction. Same transaction or occurrence
Pleadings in CA versus Federal Court
California: Fact pleading - parties have to plead ultimate facts to support each element of cause of action.
Federal: Notice pleading - Provide opposing party with reasonable notice of the nature and scope of claims
Removal jurisdiction
Allows defendant to have case removed from state to federal court where case could have brought in either state or federal court in the first place.
Where is venue proper
Federal: where claim arose or land is located (judicial district federal, county for california); where any defendant resides (federal - where any defendant resides if all defendants from same state;
CA: County where claim arose, or county where any defendant resides at time case is filed. If no defendants reside in CA, any county acceptable); where claim arose
Corporate residence for purposes of venue (Federal and State)
Federal: all district where subject to personal jurisdiction if the district were a state.
CA: county where they have PPB, where contract entered into or performed, breach occurred, or liability arises
Transfer of Venue - California
Can be changed at judge’s discretion where interest of justice and convenience of parties would be served by the transfer.
Transfer of venue - Federal
(Proper original venue, improper original venue)
Proper original venue: can be transferred where case could have been filed in new location OR all parties consent, and there is proper PJ, SMJ venue.
If original venue not proper: federal court must dismiss or transfer (if in interest of justice)
Diversity action: Law applicable to procedural issues
Federal law (Erie)
Diversity action: Law applicable to substantive issues
state law (incl, state of limitations, damages caps, choice of law rules). Why? Prevent forum shopping. (Erie)
Erie Doctrine
Principle stating that federal law applies to procedural issues and state law applies to substantive issues when federal court is hearing case through its diversity jurisdiction.
CA: Enforceability of choice of law provision in contract
Applies long as there is reasonable basis and doesn’t conflict with ca policy.
California Conflict of law rules - overarching consideration
Court looks at comparative impairment to each state’s interest in having its law applied.
Permissive Joinder
Plaintiffs and/or defendants can be joined if claims arise from same transaction/occurrence and raise at least one common question of fact or law.
Does a necessary party have to be joined if there is personal jurisdiction? What is the effect on diversity?
Necessary party MUST be joined if court has personal jurisdiction, joining doesn’t destroy diversity
For joinder - who is a necessary party?
-complete relief not possible
-absent party’s interest harmed if not joined
-absent party subject to multiple inconsistent obligations
Impleader:
Defendant party can add third party defendant to seek indemnity, subrogation or contribution. CA calls this a cross-complaint.