Civil Procedure AMP - Judgment And Appeals Flashcards
If proper notice has been given to all interested persons, judgment as to title or status of property in in rem judgments are binding on:
A The parties to the action and their privies
B Only the parties to the action
C Any person with proper notice of the action
C
Judgment as to title or status of property in in rem judgments are binding on any person with proper notice of the action. The effect of the judgment is not limited to only the parties to the action or the parties to the action and their privies. J1006 Additional Learning
People other than current possessors may have rights in real property. Indeed, the holder of a future interest in real property might not even be born or ascertained.
Which of the following statements is true regarding the rights of holders of future interests in real property who are not yet born or ascertained at the time of litigation regarding the real property?
A They can be bound by a judgment regarding real property only if a special representative is appointed on their behalf
B They can be bound by a judgment regarding real property if their interests are identical to the interests of the parties to the action
C They cannot be bound by a judgment rendered before they were born or ascertained
B
Unborn or unascertained persons who have a future interest in a property are bound by judgments as to the property as long as their interests are identical to the parties to the action or a special representative is appointed on their behalf. This rule reflects public policy concerns for the marketability of property. The choice indicating that unborn or unascertained persons can be bound only if a special representative is appointed is incorrect because, as indicated above, they can also be bound if their interests are identical to the interests of the parties involved in the litigation. The choice indicating that unborn or unascertained persons cannot be bound is incorrect because of the two instances discussed above in which they can be bound. J1007 Additional Learning
Which of the following bases for relief from judgment under Rule 60 does not necessarily have to be brought within one year?
A Fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party
B Newly discovered evidence that, by due diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial
C The judgment is void.
D Mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect
C
A motion for relief from judgment because the judgment is void must be brought within a reasonable time, but there is no outermost deadline. When relief is based on (i) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (ii) newly discovered evidence that, by due diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial; or (iii) fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party, the motion must be brought within a reasonable time not to exceed one year. J1202 Additional Learning
As a general rule, a notice of appeal must be filed with the district court within ____ days from the entry of judgment.
A 28
B 60
C 30
D 90
C
Under Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, a party generally has 30 days from the entry of judgment to file a notice of appeal with the district court. (But note that this period may be extended in some circumstances.) The filing period is extended to 60 days when the United States is a party to the action. 90 days and 28 days are both incorrect. J0914 Additional Learning
In certain cases, a writ of mandamus may be used prior to a final judgment in order to compel a trial judge to take a particular action.
Which of the following states the typical requirements for issuance of a writ of mandamus?
A The trial court’s actions constitute a serious abuse of power and the moving party posts a bond
B An appeal will be insufficient to correct the error and the trial court’s actions constitute a serious abuse of power
C An appeal will be insufficient to correct the error and the moving party posts a bond
B
Writs of mandamus are available only if an appeal will be insufficient to correct the error and the trial court’s actions constitute a serious abuse of power that must be immediately corrected. A bond is not required, so the choices that include the statement the moving party posts a bond are incorrect. J0917 Additional Learning
Which of the following statements as to recognition of judgments is true?
A A federal court generally must recognize the judgments of a state court, but a state court generally need not recognize the judgments of a sister state
B A state court generally does not have to recognize the judgments of either a sister state or the federal courts
C A state court generally must recognize the judgments of a sister state and federal courts generally must recognize judgments of state courts
D A state court generally must recognize the judgments of a sister state, but a federal court generally does not have to recognize the judgments of a state court
C
Under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution and federal statutes, a state court generally must recognize the judgments of a sister state and federal courts generally must recognize judgments of state courts. Recognition of judgments is required between state courts, between state and federal courts, and between federal courts. J0601 Additional Learning
A state court in California is determining whether issue preclusion applies based on a judgment entered in Missouri.
Generally, the state court in California will decide whether or not issue preclusion applies based on _______ law.
A California
B Missouri
C Federal
B
Generally, when a state court is determining whether issue preclusion is applicable to a particular issue, it looks to the law of the state where the first judgment was entered in making its determination. Therefore, in this scenario, the state court in California would look to Missouri law, NOT California law. A state court does not consider federal law in determining whether issue preclusion applies, though it should be noted that the Supreme Court has held that federal law applies if the prior case was heard in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. J1009A Additional Learning
When a court issues an order correcting a clerical error in a judgment, what is the effective date of the correction?
A A reasonable date determined by the judge
B The date the judgment was entered
C The date of the motion requesting the correction
D The date of the order
B
When a clerical error is ordered to be corrected, the effective date of the correction is always the date the judgment was entered. The date of the order and the date of the motion are not relevant to the effective date of the correction. The judge has no discretion to determine a reasonable date. J1201B Additional Learning
Under Federal Rule 54(b), what is required for a court to enter a final, immediately appealable judgment as to fewer than all of the claims in an action?
A Consent of all parties who may be affected by an immediate appeal
B An express determination by the trial court that there is no just reason for delay
C An express determination by the appellate court that there is no just reason for delay
B
When an action involves multiple claims or parties, and the court enters a judgment as to fewer than all the claims or all the parties, it is deemed a final, appealable judgment when there is an express determination by the trial court that there is no just reason for delay. Consent of all parties who may be affected by an immediate appeal is not required or sufficient to make a partial final order immediately appealable. Neither is it sufficient that the appellate court determines that there is no reason for delay. J0912A Additional Learning
The doctrine of _______ provides that issues that are actually litigated and essential to a judgment in a prior case binds the plaintiff or defendant (or their privies) in subsequent actions.
A Collateral estoppel
B Claim preclusion
C Res ipsa
A
The doctrine of collateral estoppel provides that issues that are actually litigated and essential to a judgment in a prior case binds the plaintiff or defendant (or their privies) in a subsequent action. Claim preclusion provides that once a final judgment on the merits has been made as to a particular cause of action, the claimant cannot assert the same cause of action against the same defendant. The scope of claim preclusion is broader—it prevents a further cause of action, rather than just deeming an issue established in a later cause of action. Res ipsa is shorthand for res ipsa loquitur—a tort doctrine that under certain circumstance allows imputation of negligent conduct from a harm suffered. J1005A Additional Learning
Which of the following factors is not required in order for an otherwise nonappealable interlocutory order to be appealable under the Interlocutory Appeals Act?
A The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
B The controlling question of law is one as to which there is a substantial ground for a difference of opinion
C An immediate appeal of the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation
D At least two appellate court judges agree to allow an appeal
A
The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 is the correct answer because it is not a requirement for an immediate appeal under the Interlocutory Appeal Act. Review under the Interlocutory Appeals Act is discretionary with the court and may be available when: (i) the trial judge certifies that the order involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for a difference of opinion and an appeal would materially advance the conclusion of the case, and (ii) at least two appellate court judges agree to hear the appeal. J0916 Additional Learning
Which of the following statements is true regarding relief a court may grant in cases other than default cases?
A The court may grant any relief that is appropriate based on the evidence
B The court may grant only the relief requested in the plaintiff’s pleadings
C The court may grant no more than the relief requested in the plaintiff’s pleadings
D The court may grant not less than the relief requested in the plaintiff’s pleadings
A
Except in default cases, a court may grant any relief that is appropriate based on the evidence. The court is not limited by the relief requested in the plaintiff’s pleadings. Thus, the choices indicating that the court may grant only the relief requested, no more than the relief requested, and not less than the relief requested are incorrect. J0911 Additional Learning
A nonparty to an earlier action may use issue preclusion in a subsequent case whenever:
A The issues are identical, the party against whom collateral estoppel will be asserted had a fair opportunity to be heard on the issue, and it would not be unfair to bind the party on the issue
B The issues are identical
C The issues are identical and the party against whom collateral estoppel will be asserted had a fair opportunity to be heard on the issue
A
Most courts allow collateral estoppel to be used against non-parties to the earlier action when the following four factors are present: (1) the issues are identical, (2) the party against whom collateral estoppel is asserted had a fair opportunity to be heard on the issue, (3) the posture of the case is such that it would not be unfair to bind the party on the issue, and (4) there was a final judgment on the merits. (The fourth element is generally applicable to all cases involving claim or issue preclusion.) All four are required. Every person is entitled to his day in court, so the party against whom the judgment will be used had a fair opportunity to be heard on the issue is a requirement. Fairness is also a consideration when allowing a non-party to use collateral estoppel. Thus, the court must consider whether it would not be unfair to bind the party on the issue. J1008 Additional Learning
In exceptional cases where an appeal will be insufficient to correct a problem, an appellate court is most likely to grant a party’s request for a writ of mandamus if the trial court’s actions:
A Are affecting the possession of real property
B Are causing delay and the delay will cause substantial additional damages
C Constitute a serious abuse of power that must be immediately corrected
C
Writs of mandamus are available only if an appeal will be insufficient to correct a problem and the trial court’s actions constitute a serious abuse of power that must be immediately corrected. The choice that the trial court’s actions are causing delay and the delay will cause substantial additional damages is too vague to be correct. If the delay does not constitute an abuse of discretion and the damages can be remedied later (e.g., with a damage award) a writ of mandamus will not be issued. Neither is affecting the possession of real property a sufficient ground for issuing a writ of mandamus since the choice does not indicate a serious abuse of power or harm that must be immediately corrected. However, the involvement of real property can be grounds for an interlocutory appeal. J0917B Additional Learning
Which of the following statements is true about the appellate jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court?
A The Supreme Court may hear appeals from the federal appellate courts but may not hear appeals from any state courts.
B The Supreme Court may hear some appeals from state courts but may not hear any appeals directly from the federal district courts.
C The Supreme Court may hear appeals from the federal appellate courts but may not hear any appeals directly from the federal district courts.
D The Supreme Court has may hear some appeals from state courts and some appeals directly from federal district courts.
D
The Supreme Court may hear some appeals from state courts and some appeals directly from federal district courts. The Supreme Court hears, on direct appeal, any order granting or denying an injunction in any proceeding required to be heard by a three-judge district court panel. It also may hear by discretionary writ of certiorari final judgments of the highest court of a state if: (i) the validity of a treaty or federal statute is drawn into question; (ii) the validity of a state statute is drawn into question on the ground that it is repugnant to the federal Constitution or to a treaty or federal statute; or (iii) any title, right, privilege, or immunity is claimed under the federal Constitution or treaty or federal statute. The choices indicating that the Supreme Court may not hear any cases directly from the federal district courts is incorrect because direct appeal is available from decisions of three-judge district court panels. The choices indicating that the Supreme Court has may not hear cases from any state courts is incorrect because the court may hear cases from the highest courts of the states as discussed above. J0931 Additional Learning
