Civ Pro Rule Extractions Flashcards
Leave to Amend
Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a district court “should freely give leave to amend when justice so requires.” The Supreme Court has held that amendments should be allowed unless they result in a form of injustice. The categories of injustice the Court describes are undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive, repeated failure to cure defects by amendment, undue prejudice to the party opposing the amendment, or futility of the amendment.
Motion for Summary Judgment
A motion for summary may be granted only if “there are no genuine issues of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” An issue is “genuine” if, based on the pleadings and evidence presented by the nonmoving party, a reasonable jury could return a verdict for that party. A fact is “material” if it is relevant to an element of a claim or defense and its existence would affect the outcome of the case under the governing law.
If a party moves for SJ, burden shifts to the non-moving party to show that a triable issue exists, and can submit a request for more time to take discovery (must speciffy discovery sought and how it will help).
In determining whether there is a genuine dispute as to material fact, the court should consider the whole record of admissible evidence [“depositions, documents, electronically stored information, affidavits, or declarations, stipulations, admissions, interrogatory answers, or other materials.”] In considering this evidence, the court must view evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party.
Partial SJ - crt can grant SJ on only certain claims
Federal Question Jurisdiction
Federal district courts have original jurisdiction over all civil actions “arising under the Constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States.” However, a violation of a federal statute does not create a federal cause of action unless the statute also provides a remedy for the violation. For federal-question jurisdiction to be invoked, the federal issue must appear on the face of the plaintiff’s well-pleaded complaint—not the defendant’s answer or counterclaim. The jurisdictional statement in the complaint must show that the federal issue is a necessary element of the plaintiff’s cause of action. Merely mentioning a federal issue that may be asserted in the defendant’s answer is insufficient.
SMJ - Diversity Jurisdiction
Federal courts have original jurisdiction over state-law-based suits involving citizens of different states where the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
In determining the amount in controversy, a court will accept the plaintiff’s good faith allegations as to damages unless it appears to a legal certainty that the plaintiff cannot recover that amount.
Domicile of an Individual
To determine an individual U.S. citizen’s state citizenship for diversity purposes, courts look to the state of the individual’s domicile when the complaint was filed. A person’s domicile is generally determined by two elements: (1) residence in a state, and (2) an intent to remain in that state.
Domicile of Individual (when too many states)
In cases like this one, where an individual resides for extended periods in more than one state, the determination of domicile often turns on “a complex inquiry into an individual’s intent.” Courts look at a variety of factors, none of which is dispositive on its own, in an attempt to determine the individual’s true, fixed, permanent home and the place to which the individual intends to return when absent. Relevant facts include the individual’s residence, the location of the person’s property, the person’s voting behavior, the location of bank accounts, the individual’s memberships and personal associations, automobile registration, place of employment, and other matters. Some courts seek to determine the ”center of gravity” of an individual’s life.
Domicile of a Corporation
For diversity of citizenship purposes, a corporation is a citizen both where it is incorporated and where it has its principal place of business. A corporation’s principal place of business is the “nerve center” where a corporation’s officer’s direct, control, and coordinate the corporation’s activities.
Venue
Venue determines the judicial district in which a lawsuit may be filed or commenced. When a federal court’s jurisdiction is based on diversity, venue is proper in a judicial district where any defendant resides if all the defendants reside in the same state. If this is not satisfied, venue is proper in a judicial district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or where a substantial part of the property that is subject of the action is located. If neither of these are satisfied, venue is proper in a judicial district where any defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction.
Residence for Venue Purposes
Individual: An individual is deemed to reside in the judicial district where he is domiciled.
Corp: A corporation resides where it is subject to personal jurisdiction if the district were a state at the time the action is commenced. If no such district exists, residency will be in the district where the corp. has the most significant contacts.
Non-Corp. Business: A business entity is deemed to reside in any judicial district where the entity is subject to personal jurisdiction with respect to the action in question.
Unincorporated Associations: The residency for unincorporated associations is determined by the location of the association itself, not individual members.
Non-Resident of the United States: A defendant who is not a resident of the United States, whether a U.S. citizen or an alien, may be sued in any judicial district.
Personal Jurisdiction - Intro
A federal court must have personal jurisdiction over a defendant for its judgment to be binding. A federal district court can exercise personal jurisdiction to the same extent as a state court of general jurisdiction where the federal district court sits. Jurisdiction over a defendant can be obtained under a traditional base or a state long-arm statute.
PJ - Traditional Bases
Generally, if any of the following “traditional bases” are satisfied, the court will have personal jurisdiction over the defendant that comports with constitutional due process:
(1) the defendant is domiciled in the forum state;
(2) the defendant received service of process while physically present in the forum state (unless the defendant was in the state only to answer a summons or was brought their by force or fraud);
(3) consents to personal jurisdiction in the forum state expressly or implicitly by conduct; or
(4) waives their objection for lack of personal jurisdiction expressly or by substantial participation on the merits.
PJ - If out of state D
State X’s long-arm statute extends jurisdiction as far as the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment allows. The Due Process Clause permits the exercise of personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendant’s like [D], they have sufficient minimum contacts with the forum state such that general or specific jurisdiction is present and the exercise of such jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
Specific Jurisdiction
NEED A BETTER DEF
PJ - Fair Play & Substantial Justice
Even if the minimum contacts test is met, the exercise of general or specific jurisdiction cannot offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. The burden is on the defendant to show that it would be so unreasonable to defend himself in the forum state that it would constitute a violation of Due Process. Factors courts consider when making this determination include: (1) the burden on the defendant by having to litigate in the forum; (2) the forum state’s interests in the lawsuit; (3) the plaintiff’s interests in convenient and effective relief; (4) the judicial system’s interest in efficient resolution of controversies; and (5) the shared interest of states in furthering fundamental social policies.
General Jurisdiction
General jurisdiction exists when the defendant’s contacts with the forum state are so systematic and continuous that the defendant is essentially “at home” in the state….
For individuals, this includes the location of the individual’s domicile. Domicile is where the individual physically resides and intends to remain indefinitely as their permanent home.
For corporations, this includes the locations where the corporation is incorporated and has its principal place of business (the “nerve center” of its operations where decisions are made – HQ);
An unincorporated association is deemed domiciliary of the state of every partner/member/owner.
An executor/personal representative takes the domicile of the decedent or person being represented.…
When general jurisdiction exists, the defendant can be sued on any claim even if the claim is unrelated to the defendant’s contact with the forum state.
