Civil Procedure Flashcards
Federal Quesiton Jurisdiction
A federal court must have **subject matter jurisdiction **in order to decide cases before it. A federal court has subject matter jurisdiction under federal question jurisdiction if the **complaint alleges a claim that arises under federal law.
**
Federal question must be presented on the face of the plaintiffs complaint. Raising a defense or filing a counterclaim under federal law does not trigger federal question jurisdiction.
If federal question, then must have (1) well pleaded complaint and (2) a complaint on its face arises under federal law.
A counterclaim in defense does not trigger federal question under SMJ.
Diversity Jurisdiction
A federal court has subject matter jurisdiction under diversity jurisdiction if complete diversity is present - every citizenship represented on the plaintiff side of the case must be different than every citizenship presented on the defendant side of the case and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
- A claim for injunctive relief may be valued by the benefit to the plaintiff or the cost of compliance for the defendant.
- One plaintiff can aggregate all of her claims against one defendant to meet the amount in controversy requirement. One plaintiff can also aggregate all of her claims against multiple defendants if the defendants are jointly liable
- if there are multiple multiple plaintiffs generally each plaintiffs claim must meet the amount in controversy requirement separately unless supplemental jurisdiction applies.
A federal court does not have diversity jurisdiction for probate actions and domestic relation matters like divorce or child support.
If diversity jurisdiction, then need complete diveristy between plaintiff and defendant and AIC must exceed 75k.
If 1P + aggragated claims v. 1D, then allowed
If 1p + aggragated claims v. <1D, then allowed if D’s jointly libale
If <1P, then each P’s claim must meet AIC reqs seperatly.
No DJ for probate or domestic cases
Citizenship
The citizenship of each party to the action must be considered in order to decide whether complete diversity is present. The rules for determining citizenship vary depending on the types of parties involved:
- for individuals, citizenship is determined by the individual state or country of domicile. An individual can only have one domicile at a time.
- Corporations hold dual citizenship for diversity purposes:
a. the state or country of incorporation
b. and the state or country of its principal place of business (the nerve center) - Unincorporated associations and partnerships are considered a citizen of every state of which its members are citizen
- for class actions the citizenship of each named party in the class who are suing count for diversity purposes. Class members that are not named may join without regard to citizenship.
If diversity issue, then need to establish citizenship:
Type of parties to establish citizenship per party:
1. If individuals, then by domicile. I only has one domicile
2. If corporation, then by either
a. State of incorporation; or
b. PPB
3. If** unincorporated associations**, then where its members are citizens
4. If class action, then where any named party is a citizen
Supplemental Jurisdiction
Supplemental jurisdiction allows a federal court with valid subject matter jurisdiction over a case to hear additional claims over which the court would not independently have jurisdiction if all the claims constitute the same case or controversy. Claims constitute the same case or controversy if they arise out of a common nucleus of operative fact meaning all of the claims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence.
A federal court sitting in federal question jurisdiction may hear a pendant state law claim under supplemental jurisdiction if the state law claim arises out of the same transaction or occurrence as the federal law claim.
There are three types of claims where supplemental jurisdiction is commonly tested in diversity cases;
1. compulsory counterclaims - a compulsory counterclaim is a counterclaim that arises out of the same transaction or occurrence as the original claim filed. I federal court sitting in diversity jurisdiction has supplemental jurisdiction over compulsory counterclaim.
2. A permissive counterclaim is a counterclaim that does not arise out of the same transaction or occurrence as the original claim filed. A permissive counterclaim can only be heard if it independently satisfies diversity jurisdiction.
3. A cross claim is a claim filed by a plaintiff against another plaintiff or by a defendant against a co-defendant. A federal court sitting in diversity jurisdiction has supplemental jurisdiction over a cross claim if the cross claim arises out of the same transaction or occurrence as the original claim.
Supplemental jurisdiction is used when a plaintiff wants to add additional claims over which the court would not independently have jurisdiction. Subject matter jurisdiction will be valid using supplemental jurisdiction if all the claims constitute the same case or controversy.
If plaintiff trying to bring additional claims in addition to first complaint, then see if supplemental jurisdiction applies:
If claims “arises from the same transaction or occurrence, then SMJ will be valid under supplemental jurisdiction.
- If party has counterclaim that is from same transaction or occurrence, then compulsory (must bring under at first opportunity or can’t at all)
- If party has a counterclaim that is NOT from same transaction or occurrence, then its permissive (can only be brought under Supp if it independently meets diversity jurisdiction)
- If party has a crossclaim (PvP or DvD), then Supp juris under Diversity juris if under same transaction or occurrence.
Removal
A. Removal allows the defendant to move a case from state court to federal court if the case could have been brought originally in federal court. Removal must be sought:
1. By the defendant; and
2. Within 30 days of learning the grounds for removal
B. Defendant may remove the case to federal court if the well-pleased complain discloses that the claim is based on federal law.
C. The defendant may remove the case to federal court if
1. Complete diversity is presently
2. The amount in controversy exceeds 75000; and
3. The action is brought in a state of which no defendant is a citizen
If D trying to move case from state to fed court, then they can “remove” it.
D, and only D, must remove in 30 days upon learning grounds for removal + must actually remove within 1 year (if P acts in bad faith, can extend beyond 1 year).
D may remove if claim arises under
1. federal question jurisdiction or
2. diversity jurisdiction and action is brought where no D is a citizen.
Personal Jurisdiction
A court must have personal jurisdiction in order to adjudicate the rights and liabilities of a defendant . If any of the following four traditional bases are satisfied the court will have personal jurisdiction over the defendant;
1. Domicile will be satisfied if the defendant is domiciled in the forum state. If the defendant is a corporation it must be at home in the form state.
2. Service of process on the defendant while he is physically present in the forum state will satisfy this space unless the defendant was in the state only to answer a summons or was brought there by force or fraud.
3. Out of state defendants may consent to personal jurisdiction.
4. Unlike subject matter jurisdiction lack of personal jurisdiction can be waived by the defendant if defendant waives any objection to personal jurisdiction by substantial participation on the merits before raising the objection.
If none of the traditional bases are satisfied above personal jurisdiction may still be obtained by using a state long arm statute. This requires that minimum contacts exist between the defendant and the form state. Sufficient minimum contacts exist when:
1. general or specific jurisdiction is present (general - dominiled or continuous and systematic presence in forum = cany bring any claim and specific - only can bring claim related to why d was in forum state) and
2. the exsistence of such jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice - courts weigh the following factors determine fairness of the formed jurisdiction in regard to the defendant:
a. convenience of the defendant
b. whether the forum state has a legitimate interest in providing redress
c. whether the plaintiff’s interest in obtaining relief is proper
d. the Interstate judicial systems interest and efficiency;
e. and the shared interest of the several States and furthering social policies.
In order to adjudicate the rights and liabilities of a D, court must have PJ.
D can satisfy PJ if:
1. D domiciled in forum state
2. D served with process while physically present in forum state
3. ***Consent
4. Waiving PJ – D shows up to court therby waiving objection to no PJ.
If D does not meet these criteria, then PJ can be established by long-arm statute, requiring minimum contacts between D and forum state. Sufficient min contacts are:
1. General or specific jurisdiction; or
2. establishing that exercising PJ does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice: Courts determine fairness by these factors:
1. Forum is convenient for D
2. Whether forum has** legitimate interest** in providing redress (remedy)
3. If p’s claim is** proper**
4. Judaical interest/ efficiency of hearing case**
5. **Shared interest of states **
Personal Jurisdiction - Longarm Statute
General and Specific Jurisdiction
General jurisdiction is present when the defendant is essentially at home in the forum state. When general jurisdiction is present the defendant can be sued on any claim.
Specific jurisdiction gives courts jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants for the defendants specific contact with the forum state. The claim must arise out of the defendant’s specific contact with the forum state. Specific jurisdiction is present if:
1. the defendant purposely availed himself of the benefits of the form state and
2. the defendant knew or reasonably should have anticipated that his activities in the form state made it foreseeable that he may be hailed into court there.
3. Generally there will be specific jurisdiction over the defendant if
a. the defendant places a product in the stream of commerce in the form state; and
b. Commit some other act to show intent to serve the forum state.
4. Generally Internet cases involve either passive or active websites.
a. A passive website is a website that is used for information purposes rather than online sales and commerce. Generally the maintenance of a passive website without more activity in the form state is insufficient for general jurisdiction. However it may be sufficient for specific jurisdiction if the defendant is targeting readers in the forum.
b. An active website is a website that is used for online commerce to make sales. The maintenance of an active website may be sufficient for general jurisdiction if the defendant is conducting significant business in the forum state such that the defendant is at home in the forum.
If D is at home, then he meets general jurisdiction (establishing long arm statute if traditional notions for PJ are not available).
If D is one of the following, he meets PJ through specific jurisdiction:
If D is** out of state** + either;
1. Purposefully avails himself to the benefits of the forum state; or
2. D should have known activities could be foreseen as to have **“hailed” **himself in forum state; or
3. If D places product in stream of commerce in forum state + shows intent through actions to be served in forum state.
4. If case concerns internet by;
1. D targeting readers in forum state through passive website (used for info only rather than for sale of products)
2. D conducts or maintains significant online business in forum state (active website).
Service of Process
A civil action is commenced by filing a complaint with the court. After the plaintiff files a complaint A summons must be served on the defendant with a copy of the complaint. The plaintiff is responsible for having the summons and complaint served within 90 days after the complaint is filed with the court. Any person who is at least 18 years old and not a party to the action may serve a summons and complaint.
An individual within a judicial district of the United states may be served by:
1. delivering a copy of the summons and complaint to the individual personally:
2. leaving a copy of each at the individuals dwelling our usual place of abode with someone of suitable age and discretion who resides there
3. or delivering a copy of each to an agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive a service of process.
Unless prohibited by the foreign countries law an individual in a foreign country may be served by:
1. delivering a copy of the summons and complaint to the individual personally:
2. using any form of mail that the clerk addresses and sends to the individual that requires a signed receipt:
3. or other means not prohibited by intentional agreement as the court orders
A corporation partnership or association may be served by delivering a copy of the summons and complaint to an officer, a managing or a general agent, or any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process.
By filing a complaint, a civil action commences.
P must serve;
1. summons; and (can be served by any adult non-party to suit)
2. copy of complaint
3. within 90 days after filing
If in U.S, then can serve P summons and complaint by delivering
1. personally
2. at dwelling
3. to authorized agent
If individual in foreign country, then can be served with summon and complaint by delivering;
1. personally
2. signed mail
3. other non-prohibited means by court
If serving corporation, then delivery of summons + complaint is to authorized agent.
Venue
Venue determines the judicial district in which a lawsuit may be filed or commenced. Venue is proper and in judicial district where;
1. any defendant resides if all the defendants reside in the same state
2. a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred or a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is located
3. or there is no district anywhere in the US that satisfies 1 or 2, a judicial district in which any defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction.
For venue purposes the rules for determining the defendant’s residence vary depending on the type of party involved;
1. an individual is deemed to reside in the judicial district where he is domiciled.
2. 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.
3. A defendant who was not a resident in the United states whether a U.S. citizen or an alien may be sued in any judicial district.
If determining where lawsuit should commence, then establish venue
Proper venue can be:
1. D’s residence, only if all D’s from same state; or
a. Residence
i. Individual = domicile
ii. Business = where subjected to PJ
iii. Any district in the U.S if an alien
2. must be where substantial part of action or property in dispute took place. Venue not proper if multi D states differ
3. If not 1 or 2, then any state where D is subject to PJ.
Changing Venue
If venue was proper the court may nonetheless transfer the case for the convenience of the parties or witnesses to any court where the case could have been originally filed.
If venue is improper the court must;
1. dismiss the case; or
2. transfer the case to a venue in which the case could have been originally filed.
If a court transfers a case to another venue the law that the transferee court must apply depends on whether the original venue was proper and the type of case involved.
1. If the transferor court had proper venue:
a. In a diversity case the transferee court must apply the law that would have been applied in the District Court that transferred the case
b. in a federal question case the transferee court must apply the federal law as interpreted by its own federal Court of Appeals.
- If the transferor or court had improper venue;
a. In a diversity case the transfer report must apply the choice of law rules of the state in which this located as opposed to the state law of the District Court that transferred the case
b. in a federal question case the transferee court must apply the federal law as interpreted by its own federal Court of Appeals
**
However, when venue is transferred based on a valid forum selection clause, the transferee court must apply the law, including the choice-of-law rules, of the state in which it is located.
Joinder of Parties
Compulsory Joinder:
A plaintiff must join an absent party or face dismissal of his lawsuit if
1. the court has personal jurisdiction over the absentee
2. the absentees presence would not destroy subject matter jurisdiction or venue and complete relief cannot be accorded among the other parties to the action without the absentee party or
3.
a. the absentee has such an interest in the action that a decision in his absence will impede his ability to protect the interest or;
b. leave any of the other parties subject to a substantial risk or incurring multiple or inconsistent obligations.
Permissive Joinder:
Partiess may join as plainitffs or be joined as defendants when:
1. some claim is made by each plainfif and agasint each defendant that arises out of the same transaciton or occurance; and
2. there is a question of fact or law common to all parties.
Tort feasors facing joint and several liability are not considered necessary parties.
If court has (1) Pj, (2) Does not destroy SMJ, (3) Complete releif cannot be granted w/o absentee (4) Absentee has substantial interest in case, (5) w/o absentee parties incurr further legal obligations
Interpleader
Interpleader allows a plaintiff or defendant to initiate a lawsuit in order to compel two or more other parties to litigate a dispute.
Persons with claims that may expose a plaintiff to double or multiple liability may be joined as defendants and required to interplead. Joinder for interpleader is proper even though:
1. the claims of the several claimants or the titles on which their claims depend, lack a common origin or are adverse and independent rather than incidental; or
2. the p denies liability in whole or in part to any or all of the claimants
A defendant exposed to similar liability may seek interpleader through a cross claim or counterclaim
Interpleader allows P or D to file suit agasint absent partiy in order to join them.
Interpleader allows P or D to compel other parties to suit based on;
P can join if :
1. Susceptible to multiple liabilities
a. Parties need not have issues of common origin
b. Parties deny liability
- D can join if;
a. D exposed to similar liability to party
i. may interplead through cross or counterclaim
Motion for Summary Judgment
A motion for summary judgment may be filed at any time until 30 days after the close of discovery.
The motion for summary judgment may be granted if from the pleadings affidavits and discovery materials on file when viewing the evidence in light most favorable to the non moving party it appears that:
1. no genuine dispute of material fact exists and
2. the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law
summary judgment may be partial. Denial of motion for summary judgment is not appealable.
If SMJ, then must file 30 days before discovery
Must file MFJ if when viewing evidence, in light most favorable to nonmoving party, there is
1. no dispute of material fact; or
2. moving party entitle to judgment
If MSJ denied, cannot appeal
Collateral Estoppel
Collateral estoppel precludes the re-litigation of issues of fact or law that have already been necessarily determined by a judge or jury as part of an earlier claim.
To bar an issue under collateral estoppel;
1. the issue sought to be precluded must be the **same as that involved in the prior action
2. the issue must have been actually litigated** in the prior action
3. the issue must have been determined by a** valid final judgment on the merits;
4. and determination of the issue must have been essential to the prior judgment.**
Choice of Law
In determining whether to apply the law of the forum or the law of another jurisdiction with an interest in the controversy the court will use one of the following approaches;
i. under the traditional vested rights approach the court applies the law of the jurisdiction where the event that gave rise to the lawsuit occurred, usually the place where the harm took place (vested rights)
ii. under the modern governmental interest approach the court applies the law of the jurisdiction that has a greater interest in having its law applied. And making this determination the court will examine:
a. the policies behind their respective laws and the forum and the other jurisdiction and
b. whether it is reasonable for the respective jurisdictions to assert an interest in the application of those policies under the circumstances.
iii. Under the second restatement the court applies the law of the jurisdiction that has the most significant relationship to the problem at issue. In making this determination the second restatement sets forth the following factors for the court to consider:
a. relevant policies of the forum and other interested jurisdictions
b. relevant policies underlying the field of law at issue
c. uniformity of result
d. ease of application of the law to be applied.
Choice of Law
3 approaches
1. Vested Rights approach (traditional) – applies law where the event gives rise to lawsuit
2. Governmental interest approach – court applies law where there is a greater interest in law application. Examine policies behind respective laws
3. 2nd Restatement – applies the most significant relationship to the problem at issue. Examine relevant policies of forum state + underlying field at issue.
Standard of Review
