Civil Procedure Flashcards
What two types of cases can federal courts hear?
Federal question cases
Diversity cases (amount in controversy must exceed $75k)
Diversity Jurisdiction
2 key elements:
- Complete Diversity - EACH plaintiff must be a citizen of a different state than EVERY defendant
- Amount in controversy must >$75k
When is diversity in a case determined?
At the time the lawsuit is filed
How can we come up with the 75k amount in controversy?
Can aggregate claims. These claims may be unrelated. (check second part of this)
Where they are suing multiple defendants, can only aggregate if defendants are jointly liable
Federal Question Basics
“Arising under” the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States
Existence of a federal question must appeal in complaint* as part of plaintiff’s* well-pleaded cause of action. (existence of a defense based on federal law will not create federal question jurisdiction)
What is supplemental jurisdiction
Where a plaintiff has both federal question and state law claims – the court has discretion to exercise “supplemental jurisdiction” over state law claim if:
- The “supplemental” claim arises from a common nucleus of operative fact as the federal question claim
- The claims ordinarily would be tried in one proceeding
Personal Jurisdiction Basics
Personal jurisdiction must be:
-Statutorily authorized
~Presence at the time of proper service
~Domicile
~Consent
~Where the state’s long arm statute provides basis for jurisdiction
-Constitutional
~Contacts (sufficient minimum contacts between defendant and forum state such that jurisdiction is fair and reasonable; see future notecards)
~relatedness
~Fairness
“Contacts” for personal jurisdiction
“There must be sufficient minimum contacts between defendant and forum state such that jurisdiction is fair and reasonable”
- purposeful availment
- foreseeability
“Relatedness” for personal jurisdiction
Specific Jurisdiction - Current cause of action only -> long arm statute
Plaintiff’s claim must be related to defendant’s contacts with the forum state
General jurisdiction - All causes of action -> domicile or “at home”
“Fairness” for personal jurisdiction
Must not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice”
Erie Doctrine
only applies to diversity cases
-A federal court will apply federal PROCEDURAL law and state SUBSTANTIVE law
3 tests to determine which law applies
- Outcome determinative: does it substantially affect outcome?
- Balance of interest test: doest state have greater interest?
- Forum shopping deterrence: increase litigation in federal court?
Areas that are deemed substantive for the Erie Doctrine
- statutes of limitation
- Rules for tolling statutes
- Choice of law rules
- Elements of claim or defense
Test for impleader
Defendant may implied TPD ONLY IF TPD is or may be liable for all or part of D’s liability to P
What is a default
Entry of default - notation in the case file by the clerk that answer was not timely filed
General rule - defendant properly served must respond with motion to dismiss or by filing an answer within 21 days of service
Entry of default and default judgement are two different things.
- Clerk may enter default when:
1) The amount in dispute is for a sum certain
2) Defendant has NOT appeared
An appearance means any formal appearance or any action by the defendant indicating that he intends to contest the merits.
If defendant appears, notice must be given of a hearing for default judgment. Defendant needs a notice of at least 7 days before this hearing.
When is a counterclaim compulsory?
When it arises out of the same transaction or occurrence. Otherwise, it’s permissive.
service of process generally
Rule 4 allows for: (i) personal service, (ii) service left at the defendant’s usual place of abode with one of suitable age and discretion residing therein, or (iii) service upon an authorized agent of the defendant.
Alternatively, service may be made as provided by the rules of the state in which the federal court sits or the state in which service is to be effected, regardless of the basis of subject matter jurisdiction.
does not provide general authority to serve process on a third party found at a defendant’s place of employment, instead permitting service only upon an agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process on behalf of the defendant.
Personal Jurisdiction: BASIC IDEA
Personal jurisdiction (“PJ”) is about the court’s power over: The parties
Because P filed the case, the court automatically has power over P. The big Q is PJ over D. PJ involves one question: can P sue D in this state?
- TWO-STEP ANALYSIS
Whether there is PJ is a two-step analysis:
• Satisfy a state statute AND
• Satisfy the Constitution (Due Process).
Generally, this analysis is the same in federal and state court. So whether a federal court in State X has PJ over D is assessed exactly the same way as whether a state court in State X would have PJ. No difference.
Personal Jurisdiction: APPLYING THE ANALYSIS
Statutory Step: Each state is free to have its own statutes for in personam jurisdiction. The content of such a statute is not testable on the MBE. In most states, the statute reaches the full extent of the Constitution, so the statutory grant is the same as the constitutional test (which we do next). On the UBE/MEE, just mention that you need a state statute and move to the constitutional analysis.
*Constitutional Analysis: Does D have “such minimum contacts with the forum so jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice”?
To determine whether this is met, we assess a set of factors under these headings: CONTACT—RELATEDNESS—FAIRNESS
(1) Contact:
There must be a relevant contact between D and the forum state. There are two factors to be addressed here.
• (a) Purposeful Availment. The contact must result from purposeful availment: D’s voluntary act. This means: D must reach out to the forum
EXAMPLES
(1) Marketing a product in the forum; (2) using the roads in the forum; (3) establishing domicile in the forum; (4) traveling in the forum; (5) sending a tortious e-mail into the forum.
Can D purposefully avail without setting foot in the forum? -> Yes, by causing an effect in the forum
(b) Foreseeability: It must be foreseeable that: D could get sued in the forum
(2) Relatedness:
Between this contact and P’s claim. Once we arguably have a contact between D and the forum, ask: Does P’s claim arise from D’s contact with forum?
If the answer is yes, the court might uphold PJ even if D does not have much contact with the forum (de- pending on whether PJ would be fair). Where the claim arises from D’s contact with the forum, it is called: *specific PJ
What if the claim does not arise from D’s contact with the forum? Then, jurisdiction is OK ONLY IF the court has *general PJ. If so, D can be sued there for a claim that arose anywhere in the world.
To have general PJ, what must be true? D must be: at home in the forum
Where is a human always “at home”? -> where domiciled
EXAMPLE
D is domiciled in VA. Can D be sued in VA on a claim that arose in Antarctica? Yes. D is “at home” in VA and can be sued there for a claim that arose anywhere in the world.
Suppose D is domiciled in State A, but is voluntarily present in State B when she is served with process for a suit filed in State B. Does this “tag jurisdiction” make D subject to general PJ in State B (even though she is not “at home” in State B)? -> yes
*Historically, a corporation was subject to general PJ in every state in which it did continuous and systematic business. That is no longer true. The company’s activity must be so systematic and continuous that the company is “at home” in the forum. Where is a corporation always “at home”? -> where incorporated and where it has principal place of business (PPB)
(3) Fairness:
Now we assess whether jurisdiction would be fair (or reasonable) under the circumstances.
However, the fairness factors are addressed only in what kind of cases? -> specific PJ only
So fairness factors are not assessed if there is gen- eral PJ–once we find D is “at home” in the forum, that’s the end of it.
In specific PJ case, how do we determine if PJ is fair?
• (a) Burden on D and witnesses. Does due process guarantee that the suit will be in the most convenient forum for D? -> no
So even if it’s hard for D to travel to the forum and to get her witnesses to the forum, the forum is constitutionally OK unless D can show that it puts her at a severe disadvantage in the litigation. This is a very difficult burden to meet because the relative wealth of the parties is not determinative.
- (b) State’s interest. The forum state may want to provide a courtroom for its citizens, who are allegedly being harmed by out-of-staters.
- (c) Plaintiff’s interest. Maybe injured and wants to sue at home.
Personal Jurisdiction: SUMMARY OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL TEST*
- Contact: Purposeful Availment and Foreseeability
- Relatedness: General v. Specific
- Fairness (Specific Only): Burden/Convenience,
State’s Interest, and Plaintiff’s Interest
There is no clear right answer here; the key is to assess each one of the factors and come to a rea- sonable conclusion. Be mechanical.
Notice/Service of Process: BASIC IDEA
In addition to PJ, D is entitled to notice that she has been sued. As a constitutional matter, notice must be “reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the action.”
In a regular lawsuit, notice consists of two documents:
(1) a summons (formal court notice of suit and time for response); and
(2) a copy of the complaint.
Together, these two documents are called: process
How do you get the summons? -> present it to the clerk of court for signature and seal
Notice/Service of Process: WHO CAN SERVE PROCESS?
Any nonparty who is at least 18 years old.
Must the process server be appointed by a court? -> No
Notice/Service of Process: WHEN?
If D is to be served in the U.S., service is to take place within how long? -> No more than 90 days after filing the complaint.
Notice/Service of Process: HOW IS PROCESS SERVED?
- ON AN INDIVIDUAL IN THE UNITED STATES:
a. Personal Service. Papers are given to D personally. Where? -> anywhere
b. Substituted service. Process is left with D’s butler at D’s summer home. OK if: 1) its D’s usual abode and 2) Serve someone of suitable age and discretion who resides there.
Must D reside there every day of the year for it to qualify as his “usual abode”? -> No, it’s where they are living at that time.
Must the person on whom service is made be related to D? -> No
c. Service on D’s agent. Process can be delivered to D’s agent. OK if receiving service is in scope of agency, e.g., appointment by K.
In federal court, can we use substituted or agent service even if personal service would be possible? -> Yes, there is not preference
d. State law methods. In addition, we can use methods for serving process that are permitted by state law of the state (1) where the federal court sits or (2) where service is made.
What is a good example of how state law might apply? -> service of process by mail. Not generally permitted federally but could be permitted state law.
- ON A BUSINESS OR ORGANIZATION IN THE UNITED STATES:
• Officer, managing or general agent. Deliver a copy of the summons and of the complaint to such a person.
• State law methods. Can use methods for serving process permitted by state law of the state (1) where the federal court sits or (2) where service is made. - ON A MINOR OR INCOMPETENT PERSON IN THE UNITED STATES:
• Use any method permitted by: state law
• Of what state? -> state where service is to be made - SERVICE IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY
May use a method allowed by international agreement (e.g., Hague Convention). Or, if there’s no such agreement on point, options:
• As directed by the American court;
• If reasonably calculated to give notice:
• Method allowed by the foreign country’s law
• Method directed by foreign official in response to a letter of request (letter rogatory) from the American court
• Personal service in the foreign country (unless prohibited by its law) or
• **Mail sent by the clerk of the American court, requiring signed receipt (unless prohibited by the foreign country’s law).
Notice/Service of Process: WAIVER OF FORMAL SERVICE OF PROCESS
Mail to D a notice and request to waive formal service, including a copy of the complaint and two copies of a waiver form, with a prepaid means of returning the form (e.g., stamped envelope for sending it back to P). If D executes and mails waiver form to P within 30 days (60 days if D is outside the U.S.), D waives formal service of process. Can be used for individuals and entities.
If D waives formal service of process, does D waive any defense like lack of PJ? -> No
When D signs and mails the waiver form back to P, what does P do? -> files it in court. Effective date is the date it is filed
That means that for timing purposes, we act as though D was served with process on the day P filed the waiver form in court.
Suppose D fails to return the waiver form. P then has D served personally or by substituted service. If D did not have good cause for failing to return the waiver form, is there a penalty for D? -> Yes, he must pay the cost of service
Notice/Service of Process: PROVING SERVICE OF PROCESS
Unless service is waived, the process server files a report with the court detailing how service was made.
If the server was a civilian, the report is by affidavit (sworn statement, under oath).
If the process server fails to file this report, does that affect the validity of service? -> No
Notice/Service of Process: GEOGRAPHIC REACH OF SERVICE
Process may be served within the state in which the federal court sits. It may be served outside that state if state law allows. That is why the assessment of whether we have PJ is the same for federal court as it is for state court.
Notice/Service of Process: IMMUNITY
D is present in State X to appear as a party, witness, or attorney in a different civil case in State X. Can D be served with process for a civil case in federal court in State X? -> No, she is immune from service of process
Notice/Service of Process: SERVICE OF OTHER DOCUMENTS
Other documents (e.g., answer, other pleadings, motions, discovery) get served, but we don’t need a summons or to do it so formally. We serve these documents by delivering or mailing the document to the party’s attorney (or pro se party – a pro se party is one without a lawyer).
Can you serve these documents by email? -> Yes, if the party agrees
Suppose we mail discovery requests to the other party. Service is deemed complete when they are mailed.
The other party has 30 days in which to respond to the requests. Does she get extra time to respond because the requests were mailed? -> Yes, an extra 3 days
SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION—“SMJ”: BASIC IDEA
SMJ is about the court’s power over the case (not over the parties). Federal courts can only hear certain kinds of cases. What about state courts? As a general rule, they can hear any kind of case. They have “general” SMJ.
Are there cases state courts cannot hear? Cases under a few federal laws must be brought in federal court–e.g., patent infringement, bankruptcy, some fed- eral securities and antitrust claims. Most cases arising under federal law can be heard by state courts.
Federal courts have “limited” SMJ. What are the two main types of cases that can be heard in federal court? -> 1) Diversity of citizenship and 2) Federal question
BTW, diversity of citizenship includes “alienage” jurisdiction.
REMEMBER: parties cannot consent to SMJ
SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION—“SMJ”: DIVERSITY OF CITIZENSHIP (AND
ALIENAGE) CASES
There are two requirements for diversity of citizenship cases:
- The case is either (a) between citizens of different U.S. states (diversity) or (b) between a citizen of a U.S. state and a citizen of a foreign country (alienage) and
- The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
- First Requirement: Who Are the Right Kinds of Litigants for a Diversity (or Alienage) Case?~Complete Diversity Rule
No good if any P is a citizen of the same state as any D.
There is a special rule that prohibits alienage if a green card alien is domiciled in the same U.S. State as a litigant on the other side of the case.
- Citizenship of a Natural Person (Human)
For a human, who is a U.S. citizen, what is the U.S. state of her citizenship? -> it is the US state of her domicile
Is there such a thing as a human without a domicile? -> No
So everyone has a domicile, and you retain it until you change it.
Can a person have more than one domicile at a time?-> No
So a human can be a citizen of only one state at a time.
How do you establish a new domicile? It takes two things: 1) Presence in the new place 2) Intent to make it your home for the foreseeable future
For intent, courts look to all relevant factors—like taking a job, buying a house, joining civic organizations, registering to vote, qualifying for in-state tuition.
We test for diversity when the case is filed.
- Citizenship of a Corporation
What is/are the citizenship(s) of a corporation? -> Every US state or country where incorporated AND the on US state or country of its PPB
Though a corporation can be incorporated in more than one place, it is incredibly rare. Usually, there is one place of incorporation.
Where is the corporation’s PPB? A corporation can only have one PPB. It is where managers: direct, coordinate, and control the corporate activities
It is usually the site of the corporate headquarters.
- Citizenship of an Unincorporated Association (Partnership, Limited Liability Company (LLC), Etc.)
What is its citizenship? -> the citizenship of all its members
If it’s a limited partnership, do you include the citizenships of the general and the limited partners? -> Yes
- Citizenship of Decedents, Minors, or Incompetents
Such persons must sue or be sued through a representative. However, the representative’s citizenship is irrelevant. Use the citizenship of the decedent, minor, or incompetent.
- Second Requirement: Amount in Controversy
In addition to complete diversity or alienage, P’s claim must EXCEED $75,000.
Whatever the P claims in good faith is OK unless it is clear to a legal certainty that it won’t exceed $75k
Aggregation*
Aggregation means adding two or more claims to meet the amount requirement. We aggregate claims of any one P against any one D
Can we aggregate factually unrelated claims? -> Yes
Is there any limit on the number of claims that can be aggregated by one P against one D? -> No
For joint claims -> Use the total value of the claim.
With joint claims, the number of parties is irrelevant.
Equitable Relief
P sues D for an injunction to tear down part of his house that blocks P’s view. Two tests; if either is met, most courts say it’s OK:
• Plaintiff’s viewpoint: Does the blocked view decrease the value of plaintiff’s property by more than $75,000?
• Defendant’s viewpoint: Would it cost defendant more than $75,000 to comply with the injunction?
Exclusions
Even if the requirements for a diversity or alienage case are met, federal courts decline to hear some cases.
What kinds of cases will federal courts not hear (“excluded” cases)? -> divorce, alimony, child custody, and to probate an estate.
SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION—“SMJ”: FEDERAL QUESTION (“FQ”) CASES
The claim in P’s complaint “arises under” federal law (e.g., federal constitution, legislation).
- Is citizenship of the parties relevant? -> No
- Is the amount in controversy relevant? -> No
- “Well pleaded complaint” rule. It is not enough that some federal issue is raised by the complaint. The P’s claim itself must “arise under” federal law. So we look at the claim and ignore other material P alleged. Ask: IS P ENFORCING A FEDERAL RIGHT?
- If the answer is yes, the case can go to federal court under FQ jurisdiction.
- If the answer is no, the case cannot go to federal court under FQ.
SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION—“SMJ”: REMOVAL JURISDICTION
P has sued D in state court. D would prefer to litigate in federal court. D might be able to “remove” the case to federal court. Removal transfers the case from a state trial court to a federal trial court. If removal was improper, the federal court can “remand” the case back to state court.
- When can D remove?
D must remove no later than 30 days of service (not filing) of the first paper that shows the case is removable. Usually, that means no later than 30 days of service of process. - Who must join in the removal?
All defendants who have been served with process. They need not all join in the same document; they can file separate notices of removal—just so all of them remove in a timely fashion. The 30 day window starts from the latest date a defendant was served.
Black letter rule: Plaintiffs can never, never, never remove. Even if D files a counterclaim against P, so P is a defendant on the counterclaim, P can never, never, never remove.
- What cases can be removed?
Starting point always: D can remove a case that meets the requirements for diversity of citizenship or FQ.
There are two big exceptions to this but these exceptions apply only if we are removing on the basis of diversity of citizenship jurisdiction.
So even though the case meets the requirements for a diversity case, we cannot remove if either of these two exceptions applies:
• No removal if any D is a citizen of the forum (in-state D rule) or
• No removal more than one year after the case was filed in state court.
One-year exception. A diversity case with an in-state D can become removable.
It becomes removable if P voluntarily dismisses the claim against D-2. But watch the dates.
Suppose P dismissed the claim against D-2 six months after the case was filed in state court. D-1 may remove within 30 days of service of the dismissal, BUT…
Instead, say P voluntarily dismissed the claim against D-2 a year and a day after P had filed the case in state court. The in-state D is now gone and there is diversi- ty. But can D-1 remove? -> Yes but it should be remanded because it is a diversity case and it was removed more than 1 year after case was filed in state court
(Unless D-1 shows that P acted in bad faith by originally joining D-2 to prevent removal.)
- To what federal court does D remove?
D removes to the federal district “embracing” the state court where the case was filed. - How Do Ds Remove a Case?
P sues D in state court. D wants to remove to federal court. Must she get permission from the federal or state courts? -> No
D files “notice of removal” in federal court, stating grounds of removal, which means federal SMJ (diversity or FQ).
D attaches all documents that were served on her in state action. She “promptly” serves a copy of the “notice of removal” on adverse parties. Then she files a copy of the “notice of removal” in state court. - Remand to State Court
If P thinks the case should not have been removed, she moves to remand to state court.
If P thinks removal was improper for some reason other than lack of SMJ (e.g., D did not attach relevant papers to her notice of removal), she must move to remand no later than: -> 30 days after notice of removal was filed in federal court
If she does not, she waives the right to have the case remanded to state court; in other words, the case will stay in federal court.
If P thinks removal was improper because the federal court lacks SMJ, when can she move to remand to state court? -> anytime, no time limit
Subject Matter Jurisdiction – Supplemental Jurisdiction: BASIC IDEA
Supplemental jurisdiction is a form of federal SMJ.
But it is fundamentally different from diversity and FQ.
Diversity and FQ get cases into federal court. Supplemental jurisdiction does not. Instead, it gets claims into a federal case even though the claims do not invoke diversity of citizenship or FQ.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction – Supplemental Jurisdiction: STARTING POINT
We must have a case that is already in federal court. So the case invoked diversity or FQ and is pending in federal court.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction – Supplemental Jurisdiction: NOW FOCUS ON ADDITIONAL
CLAIMS
In any case in federal court, additional claims might be asserted in that case; e.g., maybe P has additional claims, or maybe there’s a counterclaim or crossclaim, etc.
Must the federal court have SMJ over every single claim in the case? -> Yes
So each claim must have federal subject matter jurisdiction. If it does not, it cannot be asserted in the pending case in federal court. That means that each additional claim is tested to see if it invokes: Diversity of citizenship or FQ
If an additional claim satisfies either diversity of citizenship or FQ, it can be heard in the federal court case. But what if the additional claim does NOT satisfy diversity of citizenship or FQ? The federal court can still hear the claim if it invokes: -> supplemental jurisdiction
So supplemental jurisdiction gets claims into a federal court case, even though the claims do not meet diversity of citizenship and do not meet FQ.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction – Supplemental Jurisdiction: HOW DOES SUPPLEMENTAL
JURISDICTION WORK?
The case is properly in federal court. Now we have a claim in that case that does not, by itself, invoke diversity or FQ. We want to get that claim into the pending case through supplemental jurisdiction. Think of two steps:
- The Test
The claim we want to get into federal court must share a “common nucleus of operative fact” with the claim that invoked federal SMJ (the claim that got the case into federal court).
When is “the test” always met? When a claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the underlying case. - The Limitation
BUT by statute certain claims cannot invoke supplemental jurisdiction even though they meet “the test.”
The limitation applies only in what kinds of cases? -> diversity cases
The limitation: In a diversity case, claims by plaintiffs cannot invoke supplemental jurisdiction.
But there is an exception to this limitation: When there are multiple plaintiffs, and the claim by one of them does not meet the amount in controversy requirement. Here it is: -> when there are multiple P’s and the claim by one of them does not meet the amount in controversy requirement.
Any other time P has an additional claim in a diversity case, it will not invoke supplemental jurisdiction. So
it must satisfy diversity of citizenship or FQ. It cannot invoke supplemental jurisdiction.
SUMMARY OF SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION:
So a non-federal, non-diversity claim can be heard in federal court if it meets “the test” UNLESS it is:
a. Asserted by a plaintiff
b. In a diversity of citizenship (not FQ) case AND
c. It’s not like Hypo 5D.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction – Supplemental Jurisdiction: DISCRETIONARY FACTORS
Even if we meet the requirements for supplemental jurisdiction, the court has discretion to decline it. It can do so if the state law claim is complex or state law issues would predominate in the case. But the more likely one is this: It can decline supplemental jurisdiction if the federal claim was dismissed early in the case
Law Applied In Federal Court: THE ERIE DOCTRINE
The Erie Doctrine
Approach an Erie question in this order:
• STEP 1. Ask: is there some federal law (like federal constitution or statute or FRCP or Federal Rule of Evidence) on point that directly conflicts with state law? If so, apply the federal law, as long as it is valid. What is this based on? -> supremacy clause
Let’s say a FRCP is on-point and conflicts with state law. We know it governs as long as it is valid. How do we know if a FRCP is valid? The FRCP are presumptively valid and are OK if they are “arguably procedural.” None has ever been held invalid.
STEP 2. If there is no federal law on point, the federal judge must apply state law if the issue to be decided is “substantive.” Five issues are clearly “substantive”:
(1) Elements of a claim or defense, *(2) Statute of limitations, (3) Rules for tolling statutes of limitations, (4) Conflict (or choice) of law rules, and
(5) Standard for whether to grant a new trial because a jury’s damages determination is excessive or inadequate.
So on these five issues, the federal court does what in a diversity case? -> It must apply state law
• STEP 3. If there is no federal law on point and the issue is not one of the five just listed, the federal judge must determine whether the issue is “substantive.” The law is very unclear, consisting of some factors that no one knows how to weigh:
a. Outcome determinative: Would applying or ignoring the state rule affect outcome of case? If so, it’s probably a substantive rule, so should use state law.
b. Balance of interests: Does either federal or state system have strong interest in having its rule applied?
c. Avoid forum shopping: If the federal court ignores state law on this issue, will it cause parties to flock to federal court? If so, should probably apply state law.
Law Applied In Federal Court: FEDERAL COMMON LAW (“FCL”)
Erie means there is no GENERAL federal common law (FCL). So the general common law of torts, contracts, and property is STATE law, and federal courts must apply that state substantive law in a diversity case. But there are areas in which federal courts are free to make up common law on their own.
Examples: international relations, admiralty, disputes between states, the right to sue a federal officer for violating one’s federal rights. In these areas, there is no role for state law.
One important area of FCL is: -> the preclusive effect of a federal judgment.
Venue, Transfer, And Forum Non Conveniens: BASIC IDEA
Subject matter jurisdiction told us we can take a case to federal court. Venue tells us exactly which federal court. The country is divided into federal districts. P is suing in federal court and wants to lay venue in a proper district.
Venue, Transfer, And Forum Non Conveniens: BASIC CHOICES
P may lay venue in any district where:
• All defendants reside (special rule below in Hypo 7B) or
• A substantial part of the claim arose.
Note: The provisions above do NOT apply if the case was REMOVED from state to federal court. There, venue is in the federal district embracing the state court where the action was filed. These rules are for cases initially filed in federal court.
Can a substantial part of a claim arise in more than one district? -> Yes
So a substantial part of a tort claim might arise where the defective product was manufactured and where P was injured. A substantial part of a K claim might arise where the K was entered and where it was to be performed.
For venue, does it matter where P resides? -> No
For venue, does it matter whether it’s a diversity case or a FQ case? -> No
If D does not reside in the U.S., venue is OK: -> in any district
But if another defendant does reside in the U.S., venue must be proper as to her in accordance with the rules above.
Venue, Transfer, And Forum Non Conveniens: WHERE DO DEFENDANTS “RESIDE” FOR VENUE PURPOSES
- Where does a human “reside”? In the district where domiciled
- Where does a business (corporation or unincorporated) reside? In all districts where subject to PJ for this case
Venue, Transfer, And Forum Non Conveniens: TRANSFER OF VENUE
Transfer goes from one trial court in a judicial system to another trial court in the same judicial system. So a federal district court may transfer the case to another federal district court. Terminology: The original court is the “transferor,” and the one to which the case is sent is the “transferee.”
BUT the transferee must be a proper venue and have PJ over the defendant—and generally those must be true without waiver by D.
Exception: Under transfer statute #1 (below), the court can transfer to any district (even an improper venue) if all parties consent and the court finds cause for the transfer. It is unlikely that P will consent to this, so it’s not clear this happens much.
- Transfer Statutes
There are two transfer statutes.
~~Statute #1: If the original district is a proper venue, that court can order transfer based on convenience of parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice.
Because transfer overrides P’s choice of forum (and because P chose a proper venue), the burden is on the person seeking transfer (usually D). What factors does the court look to in deciding whether to transfer the case? -> Public and private factors showing that the transferee is the center of gravity
Public: Things like what law applies, what community should be burdened with jury service, the desire to keep a local controversy in a local court.
Private: Convenience. For example, where evidence and witnesses are
The existence of a valid forum selection clause prescribing venue in the other federal district establishes that the private factors support transfer.
P files a diversity case in N.D. Ga., which is a proper venue. The court orders transfer to W.D. Pa. After transfer, what choice-of-law rules does W.D. Pa. apply to the case? GA choice of law rules . The transferee applies the choice of law rules of the transferor unless: -> transfer is to enforce a forum selection clause
A forum-selection clause (“FSC”) is a provision in which the parties agree that a dispute between them will be litigated in a particular place.
If one party sues the other in violation of a FSC, the D may seek to enforce the FSC through a motion to transfer (assuming the forum selection clause called for litigation in a proper federal district).
Federal law enforces FSCs (if they’re not unreason- able). Some states do not. In federal court, federal law governs transfer. So a federal court may enforce a FSC even though a state court in that state would not.
~~Statute #2: If the original district is an improper venue, what may that court do? It may transfer in the interest of justice or dismiss
Usually the court will transfer if possible. When it does, the transferee applies the choice-of-law rules of the state in which it sits (in a diversity case), and NOT the choice-of-law rules of the transferor district.
Venue, Transfer, And Forum Non Conveniens: FORUM NON CONVENIENS
Like transfer, there is another court that is the center of gravity, that makes more sense than the present court. But here, the court does not transfer to the more convenient court. What does it do? -> dismisses or stays the case
To stay means hold in abeyance; nothing happens
in the case. It just sits there. Whether it dismisses or stays, the idea is that P will then sue in the other court.
Why does the court dismiss or stay? Because the more convenient court is in a different judicial system (e.g., a foreign country), so transfer is impossible!
The decision is based on the same public and private factors as transfer above, including the existence of a valid forum selection clause.
The other court must be available and “adequate.” Suppose the center-of-gravity court, which is in a foreign country, does not permit jury trials, recovery for pain and suffering, or other remedies. Does that make the foreign court inadequate? -> No, it is ok unless P can get no remedy
Pleadings: COMPLAINT
Filing this commences an action.
- Requirements
The complaint must contain:
• A statement of grounds of subject matter jurisdiction;
• A short and plain statement of the claim, showing
entitled to relief;
• A demand for relief sought (e.g., damages, injunction, declaratory judgment)
Must P allege grounds of PJ or venue? -> No
In stating the claim, federal courts traditionally used “notice pleading,” which means you only need enough detail to put the other side on notice. Now, though, the Supreme Court requires more detail (Twombly and Iqbal).
What is the standard? -> Must plead facts supporting a plausible claim
To determine plausibility, the judge uses her own experience and common sense.
D can challenge the complaint by making a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.
- Particularity
What three matters must be pleaded with even more detail—with particularity or specificity? -> Fraud, mistake, special damages.
Pleadings: DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE
Rule 12 requires D to respond in one of two ways:
(1) By motion or
(2) by answer.
To avoid default, D must do one of these two things no later than 21 days after being served with process.
If D waived service, D has 60 days from when P mailed the waiver form.
______
- MOTIONS (Rule 12)
Motions are not pleadings; they are requests for a court order.
Issues of form:
• 12(e) motion for more definite statement—the complaint is so vague or ambiguous D simply cannot respond; must make this motion before answering;
• 12(f) motion to strike—asks the court to remove redundant or immaterial things from pleadings; any party may move for this.
***Rule 12(b) defenses:
• (1) lack of subject matter jurisdiction (SMJ);
• (2) lack of PJ;
• (3) improper venue;
• (4) improper process (problem with the papers);
• (5) improper service of process;
• (6) failure to state a claim;
• (7) failure to join indispensable party.
These defenses can be put either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer.
Which of these are “waivable”? -> 2, 3, 4, 5.
“WAIVABLE” DEFENSES MUST BE PUT IN THE FIRST RULE 12 RESPONSE (MOTION OR ANSWER) OR ELSE THEY’RE WAIVED.
How late can D raise a failure to state a claim (Rule 12(b)(6)) or a failure to join an “indispensable” party (Rule 12(b)(7))? -> anytime through trial
Is there any time limit for raising lack of SMJ? -> No
So whenever the court determines that it has no SMJ, it must dismiss (or, if the case had been removed from state court, must remand to state court).
Suppose D makes a motion to dismiss under Rule 12 and it is denied. What must D do? -> serve answer within 14 days of notice of denial
- THE ANSWER
It is a pleading. D does two things in the answer:
a. Respond to allegations of complaint:
• (1) Admit;
• (2) Deny;
• (3) State that you lack sufficient information to admit or deny.
Number (3) has the effect of a denial, but you cannot use (3) if the answer to the question is in your control.
Example: If P alleges something and D knows that the answer is in D’s records, D must look it up. She cannot say that she does not know.
In his complaint, P alleges “D was intoxicated while driving his car.” In his answer, D alleges “P has no proof that I was intoxicated.” Did D make a mistake? -> Yes, he admitted he was intoxicated.
Failure to deny constitutes an admission except as to damages.
b. Raise affirmative defenses.
These inject a new fact into the case, which will allow D to win. Classic affirmative defenses are statute of limitations, Statute of Frauds, res judicata, self-defense. All Rule 12(b) defenses are also affirmative defenses.
If D fails to assert an affirmative defense in the answer, what might happen? -> she may be deemed to have waived it
If D asserts an affirmative defense, must P respond to the answer? NO. The allegations in D’s answer are deemed denied.
Pleadings: AMENDED PLEADINGS—FOUR FACT PATTERNS
- Right to Amend:
• Plaintiff has a right to amend her complaint once no later than 21 days after defendant serves first rule 12 response.
• Defendant has a right to amend her answer once no later than 21 days of serving her answer.
- Right to Amend:
D’s first response was an answer, in which she forgot to raise “waivable defenses” and forgot to raise an affirmative defense.
If she has a right to amend her answer, can she now assert the “waivable defenses” and affirmative defense? -> Yes, right to amend saves waivable defenses
- If There Is No Right to Amend:
Must seek leave of court. It will be granted if “justice so requires.” What factors do courts look to in ruling on this? -> Delay, prejudice, futility of amendment
- If There Is No Right to Amend:
- Variance:
That’s where the evidence AT TRIAL does not match what was pleaded.
- Variance:
- Amendment after the Statute of Limitations Has Run (“Relation Back”)
a. To join a claim not originally asserted
P files his complaint and has process served on July 1. The statute of limitations runs on July 10. In August, P seeks leave to amend to add a claim. Is that claim barred because the statute ran? -> It is not barred if the amendment relates back
Rule: Amended pleadings “relate back” if they concern the same conduct, transaction or occurrence as the original pleading. Relation back means you treat the amended pleading as though it was filed when the original was filed, so it can avoid a statute of limitations problem.
b. To change a defendant after the statute has run
The amendment will relate back if:
• The amendment concerns the same conduct, transaction, or occurrence as the original;
• The new defendant knew of this case within 90 days of filing;
• She also knew or should have known that, but for a mistake, she would have been named originally.
This applies when P sued the wrong D first, but the right D knew about it.
Pleadings: SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS
These set forth things that happened AFTER the pleading was filed.
Is there ever a right to file a supplemental pleading? -> No
You must make a motion; whether it should be granted is in the discretion of the court.
- 8.5 RULE 11
Rule 11 applies to all documents except discovery (which are treated by a different rule).
When the lawyer or pro se party signs documents, she certifies that to the best of her knowledge and belief, after reasonable inquiry
• The paper is not for an improper purpose, and
• The legal contentions are warranted by law (or nonfrivolous argument for law change), and
• The factual contentions and denials of factual contentions have evidentiary support (or are likely to after further investigation).
In addition, you make this certification every time you “present” a position to the court (e.g., when you later advocate a position taken in the document). It is a “continuing certification.”
If there is a violation (e.g., assertion of a baseless claim), against whom may Rule 11 sanctions be ordered? -> The party, attorney, or firm responsible
(General rule: Law firm is jointly responsible with its attorney who violates Rule 11.)
Before imposing a sanction on you, the court must give you a chance to be heard.
What is the purpose of Rule 11 sanctions? -> deter (not punish)
Often, courts impose non-monetary sanctions (e.g., require lawyer to attend professionalism classes). Monetary sanctions, if imposed, are often paid to court, not to the other party.
If the other party violates Rule 11, can you file a motion for sanctions immediately? -> No
You serve the motion on other parties but cannot file it. The party in violation has a safe harbor of 21 days in which to fix the problem and avoid sanctions. If she does not do so, then the motion can be filed.
Can the court raise Rule 11 problems on its own (“sua sponte”)? -> Yes, and there is no safe harbor in this situation
To do so, the court usually issues an “order to show cause” (“OSC”) why sanctions should not be imposed. The court must give a chance to be heard before imposing a sanction on anyone.
Joinder: BASIC IDEA
Joinder rules define the scope of the case—how many parties and claims can be joined in one case? Remember: every single claim in federal court must have SMJ.
Joinder: CLAIM JOINDER BY PLAINTIFF
This is easy. Plaintiff (in fact, anyone asserting a claim) may join any additional claim she likes—even if the additional claim is unrelated to the original claim.
EXAMPLE
P sues D for (1) breach of contract, (2) an unrelated tort, (3) an unrelated violation of consumer protection stat- utes, and (4) for cheating at poker. This is OK.
Now, with all these claims, we assess whether the case invokes SMJ.
Joinder: PROPER PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS
Many cases are brought by one P against one D. Here, P is planning the case and wants to have multiple Ps or multiple Ds.
Three people are injured when the taxi in which they are riding crashes. May they sue together as co-plaintiffs? Yes, because their claims: -> (1) arise from the same T/O and (2) raise at least one common question.
May they (or any one of them) sue the taxi driver and the cab company as co-defendants? Yes, because the claims against the two (1) arise from the same T/O and (2) raise at least one common question. Then, with these parties, assess whether the case invokes diversity or FQ.
Joinder: NECESSARY AND INDISPENSABLE
PARTIES
The case has been filed. Now the court might force some nonparty (“absentee”) to join in the case.
Why would a court force a nonparty into the case? -> because he is necessary
- (step 1) WHO’S NECESSARY (OR “REQUIRED”)?
An absentee (A) who meets ANY of these tests:
a. Without A, the court cannot accord complete relief among existing parties (worried about multiple suits); OR
b. A’s interest may be harmed if he is not joined (practical harm); OR
c. A claims an interest that subjects a party (usually D) to a risk of multiple obligations.
Which is probably most likely on the bar exam? -> test b
BTW, are joint tortfeasors necessary? -> never
- (step 2) CAN A BE JOINED?
So you are necessary. NOW see if your joinder is “feasible.” It is feasible if: (1) there is PJ over you and (2) joining you will not goof up diversity jurisdiction (the court determines whether you would come in as a P or a D to see if bringing you in will goof up diversity).
If your joinder is feasible, what happens? -> court orders joinder of absentee - (step 3) IF A CANNOT BE JOINED
What happens if you (A) cannot be joined (e.g., no PJ over you)? The court must do one of two things. What are the choices? -> proceed without A or dismiss entire case
How does the court make that decision? It looks at these factors:
• Is there an alternative forum available? (maybe some state court);
• What is the actual likelihood of harm to you?
• Can the court shape relief to avoid that harm to you?
What happens if the court decides to dismiss rather than to proceed without you (A)? -> we call A indespensible
(Remember that’s a Rule 12(b) defense – dismiss for failing to join an indispensable party.)