Civil Procedure Flashcards
What is the two prong analysis to determine if a federal judge should apply state law or ignore state law?
The Hanna prong, and the Erie prong
Provide a basic definition of Personal Jurisdiction.
It is the power the courts have over the parties
Provide a basic definition of Subject Matter Jurisdiction.
It is the power the courts have over the case, does the court have the authority to hear this kind of case?
What must every single claim have in order to be heard in federal court?
Subject Matter Jurisdiction (Limited)
What are the different kinds of jurisdiction that make up Subject Matter Jurisdiction for federal courts?
Diversity (of Citizenship) Jurisdiction and Federal Question Jurisdiction
Or there must be a statute providing for exclusive federal jurisdiction
What kind of jurisdiction do state courts have?
General Subject Matter Jurisdiction - they can hear any kind of case
What rule dictates the kind of cases (jurisdiction) of federal courts?
Article 3 of the Constitution
If you have jurisdiction to go to federal court, must you?
No, unless you fall within the minor exception of having a federal question requiring federal court
What statute covers Diversity of Citizenship Jurisdiction?
Section 1332(a)(1) of the Judicial Code
What are the two requirements to satisfy Diversity of Citizenship?
- The case is between citizens of different states, and
2. The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000
What is the Complete Diversity Rule?
It holds that there is no diversity if any plaintiff is a citizen of the same state as any defendant
What is the case that established the Complete Diversity Rule?
Strawbridge vs Curtiss (1806)
Define the citizenship of a human being.
A US citizen is a citizen of the US where she is domiciled, and that is true until she affirmatively changes her domicile
How do you affirmatively change your domicile?
- You must be physically present in said place, and
- You must form the intent to make that place your permanent home
Otherwise, you retain citizenship of your original domicile
What statute defines the citizenship of a corporation?
1332(c)(1) of the Judicial code
Define the citizenship of a corporation.
A corporation is a citizen (1) of all states where incorporated and (2) the corporation is also a citizen of the one state where it has its principal place of business
Can a corporation be a citizen of more than one state?
Yes
What case confirmed the rule for principal place of business?
Hertz Company vs Friend (SC 2010)
What is the rule for principal place of business?
A company’s principal place of business is where the managers (usually board of directors) direct, control and coordinate corporate activities (the “nerve centre”)
How do you determine citizenship of an unincorporated business?
You use the citizenship of all of the business’s members, so a business could have citizenship in multiple states
What is the process to determine if the first part of Diversity of Citizenship is satisfied?
If the plaintiff is human, their citizenship is determined by their domicile; if the plaintiff is a business, if incorporated, follow statute, otherwise its citizenship is the citizenship of its members, then check that the Complete Diversity Rule applies
What amount must be exceeded in order to satisfy the second part of Diversity of Citizenship?
$75,000
Finish the sentence: Whatever the plaintiff claims will govern, unless…
…it is clear to a legal certainty that she cannot recover more than $75,000
Define aggregation within the context of amount in controversy.
It is where we must add multiple claims to get over $75,000
What rule is applied for aggregation issues?
We only aggregate where the plaintiff is a sole plaintiff claiming against a sole defendant. You cannot aggregate claims if you have multiple parties on either side
Explain the difference between an aggregation issue and a joint claim.
Both allow you to increase the total value of the claim, however whereas aggregation of claims is restricted to a single plaintiff and single defendant, joint claims do not have such a restriction; the number of parties is irrelevant
What statute governs Federal Question Jurisdiction?
Section 1331 of the Judicial Code
When does Federal Question Jurisdiction arise?
When the claim arises under federal law
How do you check a claim arises under federal law, warranting Federal Question Jurisdiction?
Use the Well Pleaded Complaint Rule
What is the Well Pleaded Complaint Rule?
Look only at the complaint. You ignore everything except the claim itself
Ask yourself if the plaintiff is enforcing a federal right. If yes, it is a Federal Question case
What case established the Well Pleaded Complaint Rule?
Mottley (SC 1908)
What were the facts in Mottley (SC 1908)?
The Mottley’s were passengers on a railroad when they were injured. They sued the railroad and settled the case for a lifetime pass. Congress then passed a law (federal) holding that railroads cannot honour free passes. The railroad subsequently refused to accept the passes used by the Mottley’s, and the Mottley’s sued for breach of contract, stating that the federal statute did not apply to them
What was the decision held in Mottley (SC 1908)?
The SC held that it was not a federal question case because the claim did not arise under federal law.
The federal statute introduce gave no federal right to the Mottley’s, so the Mottley’s could not enforce such a law.
The claim itself was simply a breach of contract, and their argument that the new federal law did not apply was distinct from the claim itself, actually anticipating a defence the railroad would raise rather than claiming anything
What is Supplemental Jurisdiction?
This gets claims into a case that is already in federal court
What statute governs Supplemental Jurisdiction?
Section 1367 of the Judicial Code
What case governs Supplemental Jurisdiction?
The Gibbs case (1966) (United Mine Works vs Gibbs)
What were the facts of Gibbs (1966)?
This involved labour disputes in coal mines in Appalachian. The plaintiff, a Tennessee citizen, asserted two claims against the defendant, also a citizen of Tennessee.
One of the claims arose under federal labour laws, invoking federal question. The other claim arose under a question of state law. Both claims arose from the same real world event
What was held in Gibbs (1966)?
It was held that the federal court could hear the other claim on state law, that they had supplemental jurisdiction, because the claim formed part of the same overall dispute.
When a federal court takes jurisdiction, it takes jurisdiction over an entire case as it relates to the same overall dispute.
You get supplemental jurisdiction if the claim shares a common nucleus of operative fact with the claim that got the case into federal court
How is section 1367 of the Judicial Code applied?
This relates to supplemental jurisdiction and is a two step process:
- Does 1367(a) apply to grant supplemental jurisdiction over the claim?
- Does 1367(b) apply to take away supplemental jurisdiction?
How do you assess 1367(a) of the Judicial Code?
It applies if the Gibbs test is met - the claim shares a common nucleus of operative fact with the claim that got the case into federal court
The Gibbs test is always met if the claims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence
How do you asses 1367(b) of the Judicial Code?
It takes away supplemental jurisdiction only where the case is a diversity case and it falls into one of these kinds of claims by plaintiffs:
- persons joined under rule 14, 19, 20 or 24
- claims by rule 19 plaintiffs
- claims by rule 24 intervenor plaintiffs
What is Removal Jurisdiction?
This gives the defendant the choice to remove the case to federal court. A plaintiff can never remove, and removal is a one way street
Does a defendant require permission to file notice for removal?
No, however removal must not be improper, otherwise the plaintiff can move to remand the case back to state court (1447(c))
What are the pre-requisites for removal?
- A defendant can remove if the case could have been brought in federal court (therefore meeting subject matter jurisdiction for federal court) - 1441(a)
- You must remove within 30 days of service of process - 1446(b)(1)
- All defendants who have been served with process must join in the removal - 1446(b)(2)(A)
- The 30 days from removal starts afresh for each newly served defendant - 1446(b)(2)(B)
- You remove only to the federal district that embraces the state court where the case was file (a venue provision) - 1441(a)
What is the in-state defendant rule?
You cannot remove a diversity case if any defendant is a citizen of the forum
What are the statutes that govern removal?
1441, 1446, and 1447 of the Judicial Code
What is venue?
Venue tells us which federal court to go to. It is focused on geographical location
What statute governs venue generally?
Section 1391 of the Judicial Code
What choices are available to the plaintiff in laying venue?
- You may lay venue in a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located (section 1391(b)(1))
- You may lay venue in a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated (section 1391(b)(2))
- Fallback provision - if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such action (section 1391(b)(3))
When does section 1391 of the Judicial Code apply?
When a case is filed initially in federal court. It does not apply if a case is removed from state to federal court
What is transfer of venue subject to?
Transfer of venue must be within courts of the same judicial system, so transfer cannot occur between state courts, only federal district courts
What court is the transferor within transfer of venue?
The transferor is the original federal court from which you transfer
What court is the transferee within transfer of venue?
The transferee is the receiving court to which a case is transferred
What statutes govern transfer of venue?
1404(a) and 1406(a) of the Judicial Code
What does section 1404(a) of the Judicial Code state?
For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought or to any district or division to which all parties have consented
What does section 1406(a) of the Judicial Code state?
The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought
When does section 1404(a) of the Judicial Code apply?
When the transferor is a proper venue, the court may transfer to another district based on the convenience of the parties and witnesses, and based on the interests of justice.
The transferee is the “centre of gravity”
What factors does the court look at when considering a transfer of venue under section 1404(a) of the Judicial Code?
They look at a list of public and private factors
What is the name of the case that lists the public and private factors courts consider when transferring venue under section 1404(a) of the Judicial Code?
Piper Aircraft v Reyno (1981)
List the private factors a court considers when transferring venue under section 1404(a) of the Judicial Code.
- relative ease of access to sources of proof
- availability of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling, and the cost of obtaining attending of willing, witnesses
- possibility of view of premises, if view would be appropriate
- all other practical problems that make trial of a case easy, expeditious and inexpensive
List the public factors a court considers when transferring venue under section 1404(a) of the Judicial Code.
- the administrative difficulties flowing from court congestion
- the local interest in having localised controversies decided at home
- the interest in having the trial of a diversity case in a forum that is at home with the law
(which court ought to be burdened with this case?)
What is a forum selection clause?
It is a clause that chooses the forum (court) in which to decide any disputes that might arise
What are the facts of Atlantic Marine (2013)
This case dealt with a forum selection clause, for which courts usually accept them provided they are not a product of overreaching.
The clause in question stated that any disputes were to be litigated in the Eastern District of Virginia, but the plaintiff sued in the Western District of Texas. The defendant moved to have the the case transferred under 1404(a)
What was the decision held in the case of Atlantic Marine (2013)?
The court held that a forum selection clause is a very important factor in ruling on a 1404(a) transfer (very persuasive). The transferee court had proper venue and personal jurisdiction over the defendant, so the case was transferred
When does section 1406(a) of the Judicial Code apply?
This applies when the transferor is an improper venue, affording the court two choices to either dismiss the case, or transfer to a proper venue in the interest of justice
What do both 1404(a) and 1406(a) of the Judicial Code require?
That the transferee court be a proper venue and have personal jurisdiction over the defendant
What did Hoffman v Blaski decide?
The Hoffman rule - the transferee must be a proper venue and have personal jurisdiction over the defendant and those must be true without waiver by the defendant
Does 1404 of the Judicial Code allow you to transfer to any district at all, even an improper venue?
Yes, if all parties agree and the court thinks transfer is a good idea
What is forum non-convenience?
This is where a court dismisses a case because there is another court that makes more sense. The other court is the centre of gravity, but the case is dismissed rather than transferred
Why must a court dismiss in forum non-convenience?
Because transfer is impossible, the better court is in a different judicial system
What are the facts of Piper Aircraft vs Reyno (SC 1981)?
There was a plane crash in Scotland. It killed all passengers and the pilot, all of whom were Scottish citizens. The plane was operated by a Scottish airline and owned by Scottish citizens, however it was manufactured in Pennsylvania. A case was brought against the manufacturer in the federal court in Pennsylvania.
What did the Supreme Court hold in the case of Piper Aircraft vs Reyno (1981)?
It held that the case should be dismissed under the doctrine of forum non-convenience so that the plaintiff can sue in Scotland. The court looked at the same public and private interest factors under section 1404(a) in reaching their conclusion
What must exist in order for a case to be dismissed under the doctrine of forum non-convenience?
There must be some other foreign court available and adequate to have such a dismissal. The fact the court may not give you the same remedies as in the US is irrelevant
What does adequate mean under the doctrine of forum non-convenience?
That the plaintiff get their day in court
When does the Erie doctrine arise?
When a case is in federal court, under diversity jurisdiction, and there is an issue of law where a judge must decide whether to apply state law, or ignore state law
What is the black letter rule of the Erie doctrine?
In deciding an issue, the federal judge must apply state substantive law (Erie Railroad vs Tompkins, section 1652 of the Judicial Code, 10th Amendment of the Constitution)
What does section 1652 of the Judicial Code state?
The laws of the several states, except where the Constitution or treaties of the United States or Acts of Congress otherwise require or provide, shall be regarded as rules of decision in civil actions in the courts of the United States, in cases where they apply
What does the 10th Amendment of the Constitution state?
Powers not given to the federal government are retained by the state
What other case is instructive for the Erie doctrine?
Hanna vs Plumer (1965)
What did Hanna vs Plumer (1965) demonstrate?
That Erie is really two doctrines, a Hanna doctrine and an Erie doctrine
What does the Hanna doctrine state?
If there is a federal provision on point that directly conflicts with state law, the federal provision wins as long as it is valid
What constitutes a valid federal provision for the purposes of Hanna?
The Constitution or a federal statute (the latter of which has its own set of rules)
Are federal rules of civil procedure (FRCP) considered valid for the purposes of Hanna?
Yes, the Supreme Court have interpreted this to mean a federal rule is valid if it is just arguably procedural, for which the FRCP clearly are (Shady Grove 2010)
What statute holds that federal rules are valid if they do not modify substantive rights?
The Rules Enabling Act, section 2072 of the Judicial Code
What are the facts of Hanna vs Plumer?
There was a case in federal court in Massachusetts and D was served through substituted service of process (okay under rule 4), but under Massachusetts it was not okay
What did Hanna vs Plumer decide?
It is a diversity case in federal court, the first thing asked was whether there is a federal directive on point that directly conflicts with state law (federal rule 4). Then it was held that rule 4 trumps state law as long as it is valid and the FRCP was valid because it is arguably procedural and does not modify substantive rights
When does the Erie doctrine arise?
When there is no federal provision on point that directly conflicts with a state law (i.e. the Hanna doctrine does not apply)
How do we know when something is substantive or procedural for the purposes of Erie?
The Supreme Court have been unclear, so there are three main theories on which tests to apply: Outcome Determinative, Balance of Interests, and The Twin Aims of Erie
Describe the Outcome Determinative test.
This arose from Guaranteed Trust vs York (1945) and asks whether using state law would result in a dismissal, but ignoring state law would not result in a dismissal, thereby changing the outcome of the case
Describe the facts and decision held in Guaranteed Trust vs York (1945).
Under state law, the case the plaintiff filed would be barred under the statute of limitations. The case was brought into federal court under diversity jurisdiction and the federal judge wanted to ignore the state law.
The court held the federal judge must apply state law on the statute of limitations as to ignore it would provide different results, and we cannot have different results in federal and state court
What is the criticism of the Outcome Determinative test?
At some point everything becomes outcome determinative.
That being said, the courts have never expressly overturned it
Describe the Balance of Interests test.
If a rule is not clearly substantive, the federal court should apply state law unless the federal court system has some interest in doing it differently
What was the case that established the Balance of Interests test?
Bird vs Blueridge
What were the facts of Bird vs Blueridge and what was the decision of the case?
State law stated that a judge should be the decider of the case, but there was no particular reason for this. The issue was whether it should be a judge or jury holding authority in the case.
The outcome determination test was inappropriate here as both judge and jury could decide on the same result.
In this case, there was a federal interest in doing it differently and ignoring state law as the allocation of authority to just or jury is a housekeeping matter on which federal courts ought to be free to do their own thing.
In addition, the 7th amendment favours a jury system
Describe the Twin Aims of Erie test
- avoid forum shopping
2. avoid the inequitable administration of law
What case established the Twin Aims of Erie test?
Hanna vs Plumer
Describe the application of the Twin Aims of Erie test.
At the outset of the case, we ask whether if a federal judge ignores this state law, it will cause parties to flock to federal court. If so, this is a bad thing because it is automatically unfair to in-state citizens as they cannot invoke diversity jurisdiction to reach federal court
Why is the case of Gasperini (1996) significant?
The court had an opportunity to explain how the three tests work together and they did not say anything
How should you approach a question that may raise the Erie doctrine?
- Apply the Hanna doctrine
2. If no, apply the Erie tests, and come to a reasonable conclusion.
What is joinder?
Under the Federal Rules, joinder must be allowed, whereby you can join parties to a law suit
When is joinder allowed?
- When the claims against the defendants arise from the same transaction or occurrence, and
- one common question of law or fact is raised
What are the different kinds of joinder?
- claim joinder
- class actions
- third party joinder
What is claim joinder?
Where a claiming party may join other claims he has against the defending party
What is a class action
Where multiple parties are joined together either as plaintiffs or defendants, with usually just one party representing the entire class
What requirements must be met in order to sue a defendant in a particular court?
- Venue must be proper, and
2. The court must have both subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over the defendant
What requirements must be met in order to have personal jursidiction?
- There must be a statute authorising personal jurisdiction over the defendant, and
- The exercise of personal jurisdiction must be constitutional
What is general personal jurisdiction?
The court can hear any case against a defendant that falls within its subject matter jurisdiction, such as if the defendant is domiciled within the state
What is specific personal jurisdiction?
The court can only hear the case that arises from or is related to the defendant’s purposeful conduct within the forum
When does specific personal jurisdiction apply?
This is true for both state and federal court, when:
- The state has a long arm statute authorising personal jurisdiction, and
- The defendant must have contacts with the forum out of which the claim arises or is related
What is the general test for applying specific personal jurisdiction?
Whether the defendant has such purposeful contacts within the state such that the exercise of personal jurisdiction over him in that state would be fair and reasonable
A party may use supplemental jurisdiction to have his claim heard in federal court if the claim meets the “nucleus of operative fact test” unless the claim…
- is asserted by a plaintiff,
- in a diversity case, and
- is asserted against a citizen of the same state as the plaintiff
What did Keeton v Hustler Magazine (1984) decide?
The victim of a libel, like the victim of any other tort, may choose to bring suit in any forum with which the defendant has certain minimum contacts such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
Respondent’s regular circulation of magazines in the forum State is sufficient to support an assertion of jurisdiction in a libel action based on the contents of the magazine
What did Calder v Jones (SC 1984) decide?
A court within a state could assert personal jurisdiction over the author and editor of a national magazine which published an allegedly libelous article about a resident of that state, and where the magazine had wide circulation in that state
Would a court have personal jurisdiction over a newspaper that sells in a particular state?
A court would likely rule that the newspaper is subject to personal jurisdiction because it has sufficient minimum contacts
The publisher should reasonably anticipate injury wherever the newspaper is sold, and should reasonably anticipate being haled into court in each state (Keeton v Hustler Magazine, Calder v Jones)
What is the general rule for contacts directly related to a cause of action?
Fewer contacts will suffice for in personam jurisdiction if those contacts are directly related to the cause of action
What power do states have over defendants in a state as parties or witnesses in another judicial proceeding?
States have limited power to assert in personam jurisdiction over defendants who are in the state as parties or witnesses in another judicial proceeding.
In effect, a civil defendant is given a “free pass” into the state while she is testifying in a different proceeding
Can in-state service of process form the basis for a state court to assert personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant?
Yes
What are the due process requirements for an in rem action of persons whose interests are known to be affected and addresses are known?
They must be notified at least by ordinary mail, service by mail meets the due process requirements of notice in certain cases, whilst summons is not always required
When is diversity of citizenship determined in a case?
At the time the action is filed, not when cause of action accrues or after the action commences
Are a plaintiff’s motive for moving relevant?
No
How will a court determine the citizenship of a limited partnership?
They will consider the citizenship of all partners, both limited and general (Carden v Arkoma Associates 1990)
What substantive law does a federal court apply in a diversity case?
The federal court applies the law that would be applied by the courts of the state in which the federal court is located, including the state’s choice of law rules
In a class action under diversity jurisdiction, whose citizenship is determinative?
Only the citizenship of the names representatives is considered in determining whether diversity is present
What does section 1441(b) of the Judicial Code (the removal statute) state?
Any civil action of which the district courts have [federal question jurisdiction] shall be removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the parties
Can a single plaintiff aggregate several unrelated claims to reach the amount in controversy?
Yes, provided it is against a single defendant
How must a federal court analyse personal jursidiction?
As if it were a state court sitting in the particular state, so it must consider both general and specific jurisdiction
What does section 1332(c)(2) of the Judicial Code state (the Diversity Statute)?
This provides that the legal representative of the estate of a decedent is deemed a citizen of the same state as the decedent
An action originally filed in a state court may be removed to federal court if…
- the case could have been filed in federal court, and
2. for cases removed on the basis of diversity, no defendant is a citizen of the state where the action is filed
What does section 1441(e) of the Judicial Code state?
The federal court may hear a removed case even though the state court from which the case was removed did not have jurisdiction
When is venue proper in a judicial district?
- where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same state, or
- a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred
How will a court usually correct improper venue?
Transferring the case to a place of proper venue where such transfer would be in the interests of justice
