Civil Procedure Flashcards
Q1
What is the standard for granting judgment as a matter of law under FRCP 50(a)(1)?
FRCP 50(a)(1) allows a court to grant judgment as a matter of law if a party has been fully heard on an issue during a jury trial and the court finds that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for the party on that issue.
(D) Whether there is substantial evidence in the record to support the
verdict, resolving all disputed issues in the widow’s favor.
Q1
What must a court consider when reviewing a motion for judgment as a matter of law according to Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods.?
The court must review all of the evidence in the record, draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party, and avoid making credibility determinations or weighing the evidence.
(D) Whether there is substantial evidence in the record to support the
verdict, resolving all disputed issues in the widow’s favor.
Q1
What is the standard for granting summary judgment under Rule 56(a)?
A motion for summary judgment should be granted if there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
(A) Whether the evidence revealed a genuine dispute of material fact supporting the widow’s claim.
Q1
What does Rule 59(a)(1) provide for granting a new trial after a jury trial?
Rule 59(a)(1) allows a federal district court to grant a new trial for any reason that a new trial has historically been granted in federal civil cases, such as if the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.
(B) Whether the verdict is against the weight of the evidence.
Q1
Can a judge grant a motion for judgment as a matter of law if there is a “scintilla” of evidence?
No, a judge may grant the motion for judgment as a matter of law if the non-movant did not produce enough evidence to justify a reasonable jury in finding for her on the issues, even if there is a “scintilla” of evidence.
(C) Whether the widow presented a scintilla of evidence to support the verdict.
Q1
What is the difference between the grounds for granting a new trial and judgment as a matter of law?
For a new trial, the judge may consider the credibility of witnesses and the weight of the evidence. For judgment as a matter of law, the judge may not make credibility determinations or weigh the evidence.
Q1
What must be shown to deny a Rule 50 motion for judgment as a matter of law?
There must be sufficient evidence upon which the jury might reasonably find a verdict for the non-moving party, not just a mere “scintilla” of evidence.
Q2
What does Rule 4(e)(1) of the FRCP allow regarding service of process in a federal-court action?
Rule 4(e)(1) allows use of any method of service that would be valid in a state-court suit in the state where the federal court sits.
Q2
How do you serve a corporation in a federal-court action?
Rule 4(h)(1)(A) allows service on a corporation in the manner prescribed by Rule 4(e)(1) for serving an individual, meaning any method valid under the law of the state where the federal court is located.
It requires delivering a copy of the summons and complaint to an officer, a managing or general agent, or any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process.
Q2
Why is leaving papers with the AD’s secretary at the office not a valid method of service under FRCP 4(e)(2)?
It does not meet the requirements of personal delivery to the individual, delivery to the individual’s dwelling, or delivery to an authorized agent.
The secretary isn’t an agent authorized by law to recive process for either an individual or corporation
Q2
Is service by email authorized under the FRCP for serving individuals or corporations?
No, service by email is not an authorized method under the FRCP.
Q2
Who is permitted to serve a summons and complaint under Rule 4(e)(2)?
Any person who is at least 18 years old and not a party to the action may serve a summons and complaint.
Q3
What does FRCP 52(a)(1) require a trial court to do in an action tried on the facts without a jury?
FRCP 52(a)(1) requires the court to “find the facts specially and state its conclusions of law separately,” whether the evidence is oral or documentary.
Q3
Does the requirement for a trial court to make findings and conclusions apply if the case is tried solely on documentary evidence?
Yes, even if the case is tried solely on documentary evidence, the trial court must make findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Q4
What is the “final judgment rule”
The final judgment rule states that courts of appeals have jurisdiction over appeals from all final decisions of the district courts of the United States. A final decision generally ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment.
Q4
Can a decision that has not ended the litigation on the merits be considered a final judgment?
No, a decision is not considered final if it has not ended the litigation on the merits. Only decisions that end the litigation on the merits are final and appealable under the final judgment rule.
Q4
Is the denial of a motion considered a final judgment?
No, the denial of a motion is not considered a final judgment because it does not end the litigation on the merits. The case continues, at least to the discovery phase.
Q4
Does the final judgment rule allow for interlocutory appeals in any situations?
Yes, the final judgment rule allows for interlocutory appeals in a small number of situations, principally cases involving injunctions, but these exceptions do not apply to the denial of a motion for lack of jurisdiction.
Q4
Is a district court’s decision on jurisdiction considered final?
No, a district court’s decision on jurisdiction is not considered final because it does not end the case on the merits.
Q4
Can a decision be appealed if it would end the litigation on the merits upon reversal by the Court of Appeals?
No, the possibility that a reversal by the Court of Appeals would end the litigation on the merits does not make a decision appealable if it is not a final judgment.
(C) Yes, because a contrary appellate decision could terminate the action.
- States an incorrect standard for appealability
Q4
Does raising a constitutional question allow for an immediate appeal from a non-appealable order?
No, there is no rule or doctrine that allows an immediate appeal from a non-appealable order merely because the order rejects a claim based on the federal Constitution.
(D) Yes, because the surgeon’s personal-jurisdiction challenge raises a constitutional question.
Q5
When may a party seek discovery
A party may not seek discovery from any source before the parties have conferred as required by Rule 26(f). The 26(f) conference must usually occur “as soon as practicable,” and includes tasks like arranging for initial disclosures and preparing a discovery plan.
Q5
Can interrogatories be served before the Rule 26(f) conference?
No, under FRCP 26(d)(1), discovery, including serving interrogatories, may not commence until the parties have conferred as required by Rule 26(f).
Q5
What is the maximum number of interrogatories allowed without court permission or agreement by the parties?
Under Rule 33(a)(1), one party may serve no more than 25 written interrogatories, including all discrete subparts, on another party unless the court grants permission or the parties agree otherwise
Q5
Are interrogatories asking about the other party’s contentions allowed under the FRCP?
Yes, Rule 33(a)(2) states that an interrogatory is not objectionable merely because it asks for an opinion or contention that relates to fact or the application of law to fact.
Q5
Does the filing of an answer by the defendant affect the timing of when interrogatories can be served?
No, there is no requirement that interrogatories be delayed until the answer has been filed. The critical factor is that discovery cannot start until after the Rule 26(f) conference.
Q6
What does Rule 56(d) of the FRCP allow the court to do when facts essential to justify opposition to a summary judgment are unavailable?
Rule 56(d) allows the court to defer action or deny the motion to allow time for obtaining affidavits or declarations or to take discovery.
Q6
What must the nonmovant show to defer a summary judgment under Rule 56(d)?
The nonmovant must show by affidavit or declaration that specified reasons exist for their inability to present facts essential to justify their opposition to the summary judgment.
Q6
What is the burden of the party moving for summary judgment in relation to material facts?
The moving party must show that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact regarding the claim at issue.
Q6
Can the mere possibility that a jury might find the movant’s testimony not credible suffice to prevent summary judgment?
No, the nonmovant must come forward with specific admissible evidence that creates a genuine issue of material fact, not merely rely on potential credibility issues.
Q6
Is it necessary for a party moving for summary judgment to attach evidence to their motion?
No, if the movant demonstrates that the nonmovant does not have sufficient evidence to support an essential element of their claim, they need not attach evidence.
(C) Argue that the motion should be denied, because the manufacturer failed to attach any evidence to its motion to show that the insulation was not used by the worker’s employer.
Q6
Why might a cross-motion for summary judgment by the nonmovant not remedy a lack of evidence?
The nonmovant must still meet the same burden of showing no genuine dispute of material fact and cannot rely on the absence of evidence from the movant.
(D) Make a cross-motion for summary judgment arguing that the manufacturer has introduced no evidence to show that its insulation did not harm the worker.
Q7
What does 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) [VENUE] allow a federal district court to do for the convenience of parties and witnesses?
Hint: BUZZ WORDS ;)
28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) allows the court to 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.
Q7
What are the two main requirements under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) for transferring a case to another district?
The district to which the case is transferred must be one where the case “might have been brought,” meaning it must have personal jurisdiction over the defendant and be a proper venue. Additionally, the transfer must serve the convenience of parties and witnesses and be in the interest of justice.
3 OBSTACLES TO THINK ABOUT:
(1) PJ + Proper Venue
(2) Convenience of Parties + Witnesses
(3) Interest of Justice
Q7
What is Proper Venue
Venue is proper in a judicial district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred.
(note: also proper in the district where any D resides, if all Ds reside in the same state; and if none of these apply - then wherever any D is subject to PJ)
Q7
When is the forum non conveniens doctrine applied in federal courts?
The forum non conveniens doctrine is applied when the more appropriate forum is abroad. For transfers within the United States, federal courts use 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).
Q7
Can a federal district court dismiss a case based on forum non conveniens if another federal court is more appropriate?
No, federal courts will transfer the case to the more appropriate federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) rather than dismissing it based on forum non conveniens.
Q8
What does the “two-dismissal rule” under FRCP 41(a)(1)(B) state?
The “two-dismissal rule” states that if a plaintiff voluntarily dismisses any federal or state court action based on or including the same claim, a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits.
Q8
When can a plaintiff voluntarily dismiss an action without it being an adjudication on the merits?
A plaintiff can voluntarily dismiss an action without it being an adjudication on the merits by filing a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment.
Q8
In the context of the two-dismissal rule, what is the significance of the second dismissal of a case?
The second dismissal of a case involving the same claims operates as an adjudication on the merits, triggering the two-dismissal rule and barring further claims based on the same facts.
Q8
Does the plaintiff’s prompt and diligent attempt to address pleading defects affect the application of the two-dismissal rule?
No, the plaintiff’s prompt and diligent attempt to address pleading defects does not prevent the application of the two-dismissal rule.
Q8
Does the fact that the plaintiff dismissed each previous action before the defendant answered or moved prevent the two-dismissal rule from applying?
No, the fact that the plaintiff dismissed each previous action before the defendant answered or moved does not prevent the two-dismissal rule from applying.
Q8
Is the plaintiff’s failure to seek a court order of dismissal relevant in the application of the two-dismissal rule?
No, the plaintiff’s failure to seek a court order of dismissal is irrelevant to the application of the two-dismissal rule if the dismissals were filed before the defendant answered or moved for summary judgment.
Q9
Under FRCP 50(a)(2), when must a motion for judgment as a matter of law be made?
A motion for judgment as a matter of law must be made at any time before the case is submitted to the jury.
Q9
What happens if a party does not move for judgment as a matter of law before the case goes to the jury?
If a party does not move for judgment as a matter of law before the case goes to the jury, they waive the right to ask for judgment as a matter of law post-verdict.
Q9
Can a trial judge decide the sufficiency of the evidence before the case goes to the jury?
Yes, a trial judge can conclude that the plaintiff has not submitted sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find for the plaintiff and can take the case from the jury on the grounds of insufficient evidence.
Q9
Does the fact that a judge ruled on a post-verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law help if the motion was not made before the case went to the jury?
No, the failure to raise the challenge before the case went to the jury is fatal to any right to make the motion post-verdict or to appeal the trial judge’s rejection of the post-verdict motion.
Q10
What does 28 U.S.C. § 1738 [FULL FAITH AND CREDIT CLAUSE] require regarding the preclusive effect of state-court judgments in federal courts?
28 U.S.C. § 1738 requires that state-court judgments have the same full faith and credit in federal courts as they have in the courts of the state from which they are taken. Federal courts must give no greater preclusive effect to a state-court judgment than the state court itself would.
Q10
How does the Supreme Court interpret the Full Faith and Credit Clause regarding issue preclusion?
The Supreme Court interprets 28 U.S.C. § 1738 to mean that if a state would not give preclusive effect to a particular judgment rendered by its courts, then the federal court is also forbidden to give the judgment preclusive effect.
Q10
Is the issue preclusion law of the state where the federal court sits relevant in determining the preclusive effect of a state-court judgment?
No, the issue preclusion law of the state where the federal court sits is irrelevant. The federal court must follow the preclusion rules of the state that rendered the judgment.
Hypo:
Investor v Company in State Ct in State A; got verdict (company’s offering materials contained false info)
University v Company in Fed Ct in State B - University moves for partial summary judgment arguing that the state court judgment bound the federal court on the on the issue of whether the company’s offering materials contained false info.
Neither States permit nonmutual issue preclusion.
Should Court grant motion?
(A) No, because State A does not permit nonmutual issue preclusion.
Q10
Does federal law allow nonmutual issue preclusion regardless of state law when applying a state-court judgment?
No, federal law does not allow nonmutual issue preclusion if the state law that rendered the judgment does not permit it. The federal court must follow the state’s law on issue preclusion.
Non-mutual issue preclusion is the exercise of issue preclusion (a/k/a/ collateral estoppel) by a person who was not a party to the prior litigation.
So here, the hypo said that Neither State A nor State B permits nonmutual issue preclusion. Because they don’t allow it, University can’t raise it, and fed courts are bound by the full faith and credit clause.
Q11
Can a party challenge the sufficiency of the evidence if they did not move for judgment as a matter of law before the jury deliberates?
No, a party cannot challenge the sufficiency of the evidence post-verdict if they did not make a motion for judgment as a matter of law before the jury deliberates.
Q11
What must a party do to preserve an objection to a jury instruction under Rule 51?
A party must object to the jury instruction at the opportunity provided under Rule 51(b)(2), which is before the instructions are given to the jury.
Q11
What is the “plain error” rule in the context of jury instructions?
Under Rule 51(d)(2), a court may consider a plain error in the jury instructions that affects substantial rights, even if the error was not preserved by an objection.
Q12
What does Rule 38(b) [Right of Trial by Jury - Demand] specify about the time limit for making a jury demand?
Rule 38(b) specifies that a jury trial demand must be made no later than 14 days after the last pleading directed to the issue is served.
HYPO:
A retailer brought a federal diversity action against an architect, alleging fraudulent misrepresentations in the architect’s design of the retailer’s store. The complaint did not include a jury demand.
The architect timely moved to dismiss the action for failure to state a claim; he did not file an answer. Twenty days after being served with the motion, the retailer amended the complaint to add a defamation claim based on the architect’s recent statements about the retailer in a local newspaper. In the amended complaint, the retailer demanded a jury trial on both claims.
Has the retailer properly demanded a jury trial?
So here, the time for a jury trial demand must happen within 14 days of the last pleading directed at an issue (typically the answer). The architect still did not file an answer, so the retailer properly demanded a jury trial.
Q12
What is the “last pleading” directed to an issue in the context of Rule 38(b)?
The “last pleading” directed to an issue is typically the defendant’s answer, not motions to dismiss or the complaint itself.
Q12
Can a plaintiff include a jury demand in an amended complaint under Rule 38(b)?
Yes, Rule 38(b) allows a plaintiff to include a jury demand in an amended complaint.
Q12
Does filing a motion to dismiss start the 14-day clock for making a jury demand under Rule 38(b)?
No, filing a motion to dismiss does not start the 14-day clock for making a jury demand; the clock starts after the answer is served.
Q12
What happens if a jury demand is included in the amended complaint before the defendant answers?
If a jury demand is included in the amended complaint before the defendant answers, the demand is considered timely because the last pleading (the answer) has not been served yet.
Q13
What does FRCP 8(c)(1) require regarding affirmative defenses?
FRCP 8(c)(1) requires a party to affirmatively state any avoidance or affirmative defense in their response to a pleading.
Q13
When must a compulsory counterclaim be stated according to Rule 13(a)?
A compulsory counterclaim must be stated in the pleading if it arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the opposing party’s claim.
Q13
What is the standard for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c)?
Judgment on the pleadings is appropriate only if there are no genuine issues of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Q13
Can a state exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant who commits a tort within the state?
Yes, states can exercise specific jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants for suits arising out of torts committed within the state.
Q13
What is “alienage” jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2) [Diversity]?
Can courts hear cases between US Citizens v Non-US Citizen?
Alienage jurisdiction allows federal courts to hear civil actions between citizens of a state and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, given that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
Q14
What is the Seventh Amendment’s provision regarding jury trials?
The Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that “in suits at common law . . . the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.”
Q14
When must a jury trial be held in cases involving both legal and equitable claims?
According to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Beacon Theatres v. Westover, when a case involves both legal and equitable claims, the court must hold a jury trial on the legal claim(s) before holding a nonjury trial on the equitable claims to protect the Seventh Amendment rights.
Q14
Why must a jury trial on legal claims precede a nonjury trial on equitable claims?
To ensure that the party’s Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial on the legal claims is fully preserved and not impaired by prior findings in a nonjury trial.
(I didn’t know this :P)
Q14
What is the rule regarding a jury trial demand according to Rule 38(b)?
A party may demand a jury trial on any issue triable of right by a jury by serving the other parties with a written demand no later than 14 days after the last pleading directed to the issue is served and filing the demand in accordance with Rule 5(d).
Q14
Why doesn’t a party have the right to a jury trial on an equitable claim?
The Seventh Amendment guarantees the right to a jury trial only for legal claims, not for equitable claims such as requests for injunctions.
Q15
would be admissible at trial, and will show that there is a genuine dispute about whether
A party must support the assertion that a fact is genuinely disputed by citing to materials in the record, such as depositions, documents, affidavits, declarations, or other materials, or by showing that the materials cited by the other side do not establish the absence of a genuine dispute.
Q15
What is required for an affidavit to be used in support of or opposition to a summary judgment motion under Rule 56(c)(4)?
The affidavit must be made on personal knowledge, set out facts that would be admissible in evidence, and show that the affiant or declarant is competent to testify on the matters stated.
Q15
Why is an attorney’s affidavit detailing conversations with an expert not sufficient to oppose a summary judgment motion?
An attorney’s affidavit based on conversations with an expert is not made on personal knowledge, consists of inadmissible hearsay, and does not show that the attorney is competent to testify on the matters stated.
Q16
Why does supplemental jurisdiction apply to claims by third-party defendants?
Supplemental jurisdiction applies to claims by third-party defendants because they are not considered “plaintiffs” under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(b), which specifically denies supplemental jurisdiction to certain claims by plaintiffs.
Q16
What must a party do to successfully claim supplemental jurisdiction?
A party must demonstrate that the additional claims are so related to the original claims that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the Constitution.
Q16
How does the federal doctrine of supplemental jurisdiction differ from the traditional requirement of complete diversity?
Supplemental jurisdiction allows federal courts to hear additional claims that are part of the same case or controversy even if complete diversity is lacking, while traditional diversity jurisdiction requires complete diversity between all parties.
Q16
What is the rule for determining a corporation’s principal place of business? (Diversity)
A corporation’s principal place of business is typically where its high-level officers direct, control, and coordinate the company’s activities, commonly referred to as the “nerve center.”
Q17
What is required for a default judgment in federal court if the claim is not for a sum certain?
If the claim is not for a sum certain, Rule 55(b)(2) requires the court (not the clerk) to enter the judgment following a hearing, and the defendant must be given at least 7 days written notice if they have appeared in the case.
Q17
What constitutes an appearance by a defendant in federal court for the purposes of Rule 55(b)(2)?
An appearance by a defendant can include any formal action indicating an intention to defend, such as filing a motion to dismiss. This appearance entitles the defendant to notice of default judgment hearings.
Q17
What is Rule 60(b) and how does it apply to setting aside a default judgment?
[Allows a court to relieve a party from a final judgment for reasons …]
Rule 60(b) allows a court to relieve a party from a final judgment for reasons including mistake, inadvertence, surprise, excusable neglect, or if the judgment is void. It is applicable if proper notice was not given as required by Rule 55(b)(2).
Q17
How does Rule 55(b)(1) [clerk] differ from Rule 55(b)(2) [court] regarding default judgments?
Rule 55(b)(1) allows the clerk to enter a default judgment without a hearing if the claim is for a sum certain, whereas Rule 55(b)(2) requires the court to enter judgment after a hearing for claims that are not for a sum certain.
Q17
What is considered “within a reasonable time” for filing a Rule 60(b) motion to set aside a judgment?
A Rule 60(b) motion must be filed within a reasonable time, which is generally determined by the circumstances.
In the scenario, filing the motion 10 days after the judgment is likely considered within a reasonable time.
Q17 - Hypo Related
Why does the value of the damage to the company’s building not constitute a “sum certain”?
The value of the damage to the company’s building is not a “sum certain” because it cannot be fixed by mere computation and requires a hearing to determine the amount.
Q17
What happens if a defendant fails to receive the required advance notice for a default judgment hearing?
If a defendant fails to receive the required advance notice for a default judgment hearing, they can move to set aside the judgment under Rule 60(b), citing reasons such as the judgment being void or other justifiable reasons.
Q17
What is the difference between a claim for a sum certain and a claim that requires a hearing to determine damages?
A claim for a sum certain can be calculated precisely without additional evidence, allowing the clerk to enter judgment, whereas a claim that requires a hearing to determine damages involves uncertain amounts that need court evaluation.
Q18
What does 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) [Venue] allow a federal court to do for the convenience of parties and witnesses?
28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) allows a federal court to 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, for the convenience of parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice.
Q18
How does a forum-selection clause influence a court’s decision on the most convenient forum for a case?
A forum-selection clause in a contract is generally treated as binding on the issue of which forum is most convenient for the parties. The Supreme Court in Atlantic Marine Construction Co. v. U.S. Dist. Ct. stated that such clauses should control except in unusual cases, essentially waiving the right to challenge the preselected forum as inconvenient.
Q18
Does the enforceability of a forum-selection clause depend on the common law of the state where the federal court sits?
No, the enforceability of a forum-selection clause does not depend on the common law of the state where the federal court sits because 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) is a federal statute that governs the transfer for convenience of the parties, making state law irrelevant in this context.
Q18
What is the proper procedure for a defendant to request a change of venue based on a forum-selection clause?
The proper procedure is to file a motion to transfer the case for the convenience of the parties under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), not a motion to dismiss for improper venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), because the existence of a forum-selection clause does not render the original venue “improper.”
Q20
What is the maximum duration for a TRO under Rule 65(b)(2) [Injunctions + Restraining Orders] without consent of the adverse party?
A TRO cannot last more than 28 days without the consent of the adverse party. Rule 65(b)(2) limits TROs to an initial period of 14 days, with one possible extension of an additional 14 days.
Q20
Under what condition can a TRO be considered equivalent to a preliminary injunction according to the Supreme Court?
A TRO that is extended beyond the 28-day maximum allowable duration without the adverse party’s consent is considered equivalent to a preliminary injunction, making it immediately appealable. This was established by the Supreme Court in Sampson v. Murray.
Q20
When can a preliminary injunction be immediately appealable?
A preliminary injunction is immediately appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1), which gives courts of appeal jurisdiction over interlocutory orders granting, continuing, modifying, or refusing injunctions.
Q20
What happens if a TRO is not extended beyond the 28-day maximum?
If a TRO is not extended beyond the 28-day maximum, it does not fall within the exceptions to the final judgment rule and is not immediately appealable.
Q20
What is the general rule about the appealability of interlocutory orders?
Interlocutory orders, which are orders not embodied in a final judgment, are generally not appealable unless they fall under specific exceptions, such as preliminary injunctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1).
Q20
What does Rule 65(b)(2) [Injunctions + Restraining Orders] require regarding the expiration of a TRO?
Rule 65(b)(2) requires that a TRO expires at the time set by the court, not to exceed 14 days unless extended for good cause for another 14 days, for a maximum of 28 days without the adverse party’s consent.
Q20
What is the required number of jurors to begin a federal civil jury trial according to Rule 48(a)?
A federal civil jury trial must begin with at least 6 and no more than 12 jurors.
Q20
What does Rule 48(b) say about the number of jurors required to deliver a verdict?
Rule 48(b) states that unless the parties stipulate otherwise, the verdict must be unanimous and returned by a jury of at least 6 members.
Q20
Under what condition can a federal civil jury deliver a verdict with fewer than 6 jurors?
A federal civil jury can deliver a verdict with fewer than 6 jurors if both parties stipulate to accept the verdict from the reduced jury.
Q20
What happens if jurors are excused for good cause during a trial, reducing the jury to fewer than 6 members?
If jurors are excused for good cause, the jury can still deliver a valid verdict with fewer than 6 members, provided both parties stipulate to accept it.
Q20
Can the court unilaterally decide to accept a verdict from fewer than 6 jurors?
No, the court cannot unilaterally decide to accept a verdict from fewer than 6 jurors; both parties must stipulate to it according to Rule 48(b).
Q20
What happens if only one party stipulates to a reduced jury verdict?
If only one party stipulates to a reduced jury verdict, the stipulation is not binding, and the verdict would not be proper under Rule 48(b).
Q21
Full Faith and Credit Clause
28 U.S.C. § 1738 requires federal courts to give state court judgments the same full faith and credit, including the same preclusive effect, as they would receive in the courts of the state that rendered the judgment.
Q21
How does the federal statute 28 U.S.C. § 1738 impact the preclusive effect of a state court judgment in federal court?
28 U.S.C. § 1738 mandates that a federal court must give a state court judgment the same preclusive effect it would have in the courts of the state that rendered the judgment, even if the federal court would apply different principles.
Q21
Does the nature of a state court’s dismissal (e.g., “with prejudice”) affect its preclusive effect in federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1738?
Yes, if a state court dismisses a case “with prejudice,” 28 U.S.C. § 1738 requires federal courts to give that dismissal the same claim-preclusive effect it would have in the rendering state.
Q21
What is the significance of a state court labeling a dismissal “with prejudice” for federal court proceedings?
A state court’s dismissal “with prejudice” means the case is considered adjudicated on the merits, and under 28 U.S.C. § 1738, a federal court must treat it with the same preclusive effect as it would have in the state court.
Q22
What does Rule 60(b)(3) [Relief of Judgment from Order] authorize a court to do?
Rule 60(b)(3) authorizes a court to relieve a party from a final judgment due to fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party.
Q22
What must a movant show to obtain relief under Rule 60(b)(3) [Relief of Judgment from Order]?
The movant must show, by clear and convincing evidence, that the opposing party engaged in fraud (etc) that prevented the movant from fully and fairly presenting its case.
Q22
What is the significance of clear and convincing evidence in Rule 60(b)(3) motions?
Clear and convincing evidence is required to demonstrate that the opposing party’s fraud prevented the movant from fully and fairly presenting their case.
Q22
What is the relevance of the 28-day limit in Rule 59(b) for a new trial motion?
The 28-day limit is the maximum time after the entry of judgment within which a party must file a motion for a new trial; filing beyond this period makes the motion untimely.
Q22
Does Rule 60 allow for relief from a judgment due to a jury’s mistaken belief about a factual matter?
No, Rule 60 does not provide relief for a judgment based on a jury’s mistaken factual finding; it addresses mistakes by litigants or lawyers, not fact finders.
Q22
What is the condition for newly discovered evidence to be valid for relief under Rule 60(b)(2) [Relief from Judgment]?
The newly discovered evidence must have been in existence at the time of the trial and not discoverable with reasonable diligence before the trial ended.
HYPO:
A plaintiff sued a defendant in federal court for injuries arising out of an accident involving the parties. The plaintiff alleged and presented evidence at trial demonstrating that her injuries had left her legs permanently paralyzed. The jury found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded her $5 million in damages. Two months after the court entered judgment, the defendant was given a videotape made that day showing the plaintiff jogging with her doctor.
What is the best way for the defendant to seek relief from the judgment?
Rule 60(b)(2) requires that the evidence must have existed at the time of the trial, and the videotape did not exist until after the judgment was entered.
Q23
who may remove a case to federal court?
28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) states that only the defendant or defendants may remove a civil action brought in a state court to a federal court.
Q23
Can a plaintiff remove a case to federal court
No, only defendants have the right to remove a case to federal court
Q23
What should a defendant do if a plaintiff improperly removes a case to federal court?
The defendant should file a timely motion to remand the case back to state court
