Civil Procedure

Question 1

Federal Question Jurisdiction

Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Answer 1

When the claim arises under the U.S. Constitution, a federal treaty, or a federal law.

Question 2

Diversity Jurisdiction

Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Answer 2

When the opposing parties are citizens of different states and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.

Question 3

Home Court Advantage Rule

Forum Defendant Rule

Answer 3

Prohibits removal to Federal Court when:
(1) subject-matter jurisdiction arises from diversity jurisdiction and
(2) a defendant is a citizen of the state where the case was filed.

Question 4

General Jurisdiction

Personal Jurisdiction

Answer 4

when the defendant has continuous and systematic contacts with the forum state that are so substantial that the defendant is essentially “at home” (i.e., where a defendant is domiciled)

Question 5

Specific Jurisdiction

Personal Jurisdiction

Answer 5

when the plaintiff’s claim arises from the defendant’s minimum contacts with the forum state and the exercise of jurisdiction would comply with notions of fair play and substantial justice.

Question 6

Does failure to provide proof of service affect the validity of service?

Answer 6

NO

Question 7

What is required to an answer to a complaint?

Answer 7

• Admissions & denials
• Motions not waived
• Affirmative defenses
• Compulsory counterclaims

Question 8

Why may a court decline to exercise supplement jurisdiction?

Answer 8

Claim raises novel/complex issue of state law
Claim predominates over original claim
Original claims have been dismissed
Or other compelling reasons

Question 9

Class Action Fairness Act

Answer 9

Allows a federal court to exercuse subject matter jurisdiction when:

• Class contains ≥ 100 members
• at least one class member & one defendant are diverse and
• amount in controversy for aggregated claims exceeds $5 million

Question 10

Deposition

Modes of Discovery

Answer 10

• Written or oral examination of party or nonparty
• 10 per party

Question 11

Interrogatories

Modes of Discovery

Answer 11

• Written questions served upon a party
• Serve up to 25
• Response due within 30 days of service

Question 12

Requests for Production

Modes of Discovery

Answer 12

• Request served on party (or subpoena served on nonparty) to produce & allow inspection of documents, electronic information, tangible items, or land
• No limit
• Written response due within 30 days of service

Question 13

Requests for Admissions

Modes of Discovery

Answer 13

• Requests served on other party to admit truth of facts within scope of discovery
• No limit
• Written response due within 30 days of service

Question 14

Physical/mental exams

Modes of Discovery

Answer 14

Order by court or parties’ agreement for physical or mental examination of party if those conditions are in controversy

Question 15

Motion for Summary Judgement

Standard to Grant

FRCP 56

Answer 15

No genuine dispute as to any material fact AND movant entitled to judgment as a matter of law:

• evidence must be viewed in light most favorable to nonmovant
• all doubts must be resolved in nonmovant’s favor

Question 16

Motion for Summary Judgement

Timing

FRCP 56

Answer 16

Motion may be filed until 30 days after close of discovery OR time set by local rule or court

Question 17

Motion for Summary Judgement

Standard to Grant

FRCP 56

Answer 17

Movant has initial burden to establish standard:
* may support by relying on pleadings, affidavits, declarations, discovery, or other materials containing admissible facts

If initial burden is met, burden shifts to nonmovant to either:
* show specific disputed facts through affidavits, declarations, discovery, or other materials containing admissible facts (cannot rely on pleadings) or
* request postponement for additional discovery & support with affidavit or declaration

Question 18

Judgement as a Matter of Law

Timing

FRCP 50

Answer 18

• May be filed after nonmovant presents its case but before case is submitted to jury
• May be renewed within 28 days after entry of final judgment

Question 19

Judgement as a Matter of Law

Procedural Requirements

FRCP 50

Answer 19

Movant must:
* specify judgment sought & law/facts entitling movant to judgment

Court must:
* view evidence & draw all reasonable inferences in nonmovant’s favor
* disregard evidence favorable to movant that jury is not required to believe
* not consider credibility of witnesses or evaluate weight of evidence

Question 21

Judgement as a Matter of Law

Standard for Granting

FRCP 50

Answer 21

• Evidence is legally insufficient for reasonable jury to find in nonmovant’s favor

Question 21

How many jurors are needed for a civil trial?

FRCP 48

Answer 21

Begin with at least 6 but no more than 12

Question 22

Must a jury verdict be unanimous?

FRCP 48

Answer 22

Yes, by at least 6 jurors.

Unless the parties stipulate otherwise

Question 23

When can a juror be excused for good cause?

Answer 23

Anytime during trial or after deliberations have begun.

Question 24

What is the standard of review for a Legal Issue?

e.g., conclusion of law, jury instructions

Answer 24

De Novo

• No deference
• Reversal if reasonable belief judge misinterpreted the law

Question 25

What is the standard of review for a Fact Issue?

e.g., credibility of witnesses, factual determinations/verdict

Answer 25

Clear Error
* High Deference
* Reverse if no reasonable judge would have made finding

Substantial Evidence
* High Deference
* Reverse if no reasonable jury would have made finding

Question 26

What is the standard of review for a Discretionary ruling?

e.g, injunctions, admissibility of evidence

Answer 26

Abuse of Discretion
* High Deference
* Reverse if decision was unreasonable/arbitrary

Question 27

Mutual Collateral Estoppel

I.e., Issue Preclusion

Answer 27

Parties from first action assert collateral estoppel in subsequent action against other parties from first action

Question 28

Non-Mutual Collateral Estoppel

I.e., Issue Preclusion

Answer 28

Nonparties from first action assert collateral estoppel in subsequent action against other parties from first action

Question 29

Offensive Collateral Estoppel

I.e., Issue Preclusion

Answer 29

Plaintiff in second action asserts to establish issue from first action. Not permitted if:

• plaintiff could have easily joined first action
• defendant had little incentive to vigorously defend in first action
• second action affords procedural opportunities unavailable in first action or
• inconsistent findings on issue exist

Question 30

Defensive Collateral Estoppel

I.e., Issue Preclusion

Answer 30

Defendant in second action asserts to avoid relitigating issue from first action