CIVIL PROCEDURE LAW Flashcards
Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction: Generally
FDS
A federal court can hear claims based on (1) federal questions, (2) diversity of citizenship, or (3) supplemental jurisdiction.
Federal Questions: This refers to cases involving the interpretation and application of the U.S. Constitution, federal laws, or treaties.
Diversity of Citizenship: This requires that the parties involved are from different states or countries, and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
Supplemental Jurisdiction: This allows a federal
court to hear additional claims that are related to the original jurisdiction-granting claim, even if the court would not independently have jurisdiction over those claims.
Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction: Federal Question
LJFQCTF
A federal court is a court of limited jurisdiction that can hear claims based on federal questions arising under the U.S. Constitution, U.S. treaties, or federal laws.
Limited Jurisdiction:
Federal courts can only hear cases authorized by the Constitution or federal statutes.
Federal Questions:
Cases involving:
The U.S. Constitution
U.S. treaties
Federal laws
Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction: Diversity
CDPDACPGFG75K
A federal court can hear a claim based on diversity jurisdiction where (1) there is complete diversity of citizenship between all plaintiffs and defendants and (2) the amount in controversy is pled in good faith to be greater than $75,000.
Complete Diversity of Citizenship: This means that all plaintiffs must be from different states or countries than all defendants.
Amount in Controversy: The claimed amount must exceed $75,000 and must be stated in good faith.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction: Supplemental Jurisdiction
SCAF CNOF
A federal court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a state law claim when such a claim arises from a common nucleus of operative fact as the claims the court has original jurisdiction over.
May Exercise Supplemental Jurisdiction: This means that the court has the discretion to hear additional claims.
State Law Claim: Refers to a claim based on state law rather than federal law.
Common Nucleus of Operative Fact: The state law claim must be related to the original claim by arising from the same transaction or occurrence.
Determining Citizenship: Person
PP SITR 4IPOT
A person is domiciled in the state where she is (1) physically present and (2) has a subjective intent to remain for an indefinite period of time.
Physically Present: The person must be physically located in the state.
Subjective Intent to Remain: The person must have the intention to stay in that state for an indefinite period of time.
Determining Citizenship: Corporation
DIPPB
A corporation has dual citizenship and is domiciled in (1) any state where it is incorporated and (2) the state where it has its principal place of business, i.e., its headquarters or nerve center.
Dual Citizenship: A corporation is considered to have citizenship in two places.
Incorporated: The state where the corporation is legally created.
Principal Place of Business: The main location where the corporation’s executive offices are located, also known as its headquarters or nerve center.
Personal Jurisdiction: Traditional Bases
SFS CJ DFS W
Personal jurisdiction refers to a court’s authority to exercise jurisdiction over a defendant.
A court can exercise personal jurisdiction when the defendant (1) is served in the forum state, (2) consents to jurisdiction, (3) is domiciled in the forum state, or (4) via waiver (appearing in the action without objecting).
Authority to Exercise Jurisdiction: The power of a court to make legal decisions and judgments over a person or entity.
Served in the Forum State: The defendant is formally given legal notice of a proceeding in the state.
Consents to Jurisdiction: The defendant agrees to the court’s jurisdiction.
Domiciled in the Forum State: The defendant resides in the state with the intent to remain there.
Waiver: The defendant appears in the action without objecting to the court’s jurisdiction.
Long-Arm Jurisdiction
SMC N2OTNFP SJ
To exercise long-arm jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant, the state must have a long-arm statute and the defendant must have sufficient minimum contacts so as not to offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
Long-Arm Statute: A law that allows a state to exercise jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants under certain conditions.
Sufficient Minimum Contacts: The defendant must have enough connections to the state for it to be fair to require them to defend a lawsuit there.
Traditional Notions of Fair Play and Substantial Justice: Legal standards ensuring that exercising jurisdiction is reasonable and just.
General Jurisdiction
CFS SSN H
General jurisdiction exists when the defendant’s contacts with the forum state are so substantial and of such nature that the defendant is essentially at home in the state. For an individual, this means the defendant is domiciled in the state. For a corporation, this is usually where it is incorporated or headquartered.
So Substantial and Of Such Nature: The defendant’s contacts with the state must be significant and continuous.
Essentially At Home: The defendant must have such a strong connection to the state that they are considered “at home” there.
Domiciled: For individuals, being domiciled means they reside in the state with the intent to remain there.
Incorporated or Headquartered: For corporations, being “at home” typically means being incorporated or having their main office (headquarters) in the state.
Specific Jurisdiction
FS UC DC
For specific jurisdiction, there must be a connection between the forum state and the underlying controversy and the lawsuit arises from or relates to the defendant’s contacts with the state.
Forum State: The state where the court is located.
Underlying Controversy: The dispute or issue at the center of the lawsuit.
Arises From or Relates To: The lawsuit must originate from or be connected to the defendant’s activities within the state.
Contacts with the State: The defendant’s actions or presence within the state.
Venue
R SC SP PJ
Venue is proper in any district where: (1) any defendant resides (if all defendants are residents of the forum state); (2) a substantial part of the claim arose; (3) a substantial part of the property is located if the property is the subject of the action; or (4) if none of the above, where any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction.
Any Defendant Resides: Venue is proper where any defendant lives, provided all defendants live in the forum state.
Substantial Part of the Claim Arose: Venue is proper where a significant portion of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred.
Substantial Part of the Property is Located: Venue is proper where the property in question is situated if the property is central to the action.
Any Defendant Subject to Personal Jurisdiction: If none of the above conditions are met, venue is proper where any defendant is subject to the court’s jurisdiction.
Motions for Summary Judgment
CCE LMF NMP NGIMF JMOL
A motion for summary judgment will be granted when: (1) the court considered the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party; (2) there is no genuine issue of material fact; and (3) the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Considered the Evidence in the Light Most Favorable to the Non-Moving Party: The court must evaluate the evidence with a bias towards the non-moving party, assuming that all favorable evidence for the non-moving party is true.
No Genuine Issue of Material Fact: The facts are clear and undisputed, and there is no need for a trial to resolve factual issues.
Entitled to Judgment as a Matter of Law: Based on the undisputed facts, the moving party deserves to win as a legal matter.
Aggregation Rules:
Aggregation Rules:
Single Plaintiff vs. Single Defendant: A single plaintiff can aggregate multiple claims against a single defendant to meet the threshold.
Multiple Plaintiffs or Defendants: Multiple plaintiffs cannot aggregate their claims against a single defendant unless they share a common undivided interest. Similarly, a single plaintiff cannot aggregate claims against multiple defendants unless the defendants are jointly liable.
Joint Claims: The total value of the joint claim must exceed $75,000.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Subject Matter Jurisdiction (SMJ)
Rule Statement: Federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction over cases involving federal questions, diversity jurisdiction, and supplemental jurisdiction.
Elements:
Federal Question Jurisdiction: Claims arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.
Diversity Jurisdiction:
Complete Diversity: No plaintiff shares citizenship with any defendant.
Amount in Controversy: Exceeds $75,000.
Supplemental Jurisdiction: Claims related to those within the court’s original jurisdiction, arising from a common nucleus of operative fact.
Mnemonic for Diversity Jurisdiction: “CAVe”
Complete diversity
Amount in controversy over $75,000
Variety of claims
Common Testing Scenarios:
Timing Issues: Diversity must exist at the time the case is filed, not when the cause of action arose.
Amount in Controversy: Courts will assess the claim amount in good faith; it must not be legally certain that the plaintiff cannot recover more than $75,000.
Class Actions: If the claim exceeds $5,000,000, minimal diversity suffices.
Common Mistakes:
Misunderstanding the timing for assessing diversity.
Incorrectly calculating or misunderstanding the amount in controversy requirement.
Overlooking the rules for class actions and minimal diversity.
Supplemental Jurisdiction “Shotgun” Rule: Can ride with the primary claim if arising from a common nucleus of operative fact and does not destroy diversity if based on diversity jurisdiction.
Removal Jurisdiction:
Removal Jurisdiction:
Only defendants can remove a case to federal court.
All defendants must consent.
Must be filed within 30 days of the case becoming removable and within one year of filing the original complaint, barring bad faith by the plaintiff.
Mnemonic for Removal: “DUCT”
Defendants only
Unanimous consent
Complete diversity (no in-state defendants)
Thirty days to remove
Personal Jurisdiction (PJ)
Personal Jurisdiction (PJ)
Rule Statement: Courts must have personal jurisdiction over the parties, which can be established through traditional bases or long-arm statutes consistent with due process.
Elements:
Traditional Bases:
Domicile: Fixed, permanent home.
Tagging: Being served within the forum state.
Consent/Waiver: Agreement or failing to contest PJ.
Long-Arm Jurisdiction: Requires a long-arm statute and compliance with constitutional due process (sufficient minimum contacts and fair play and substantial justice).
Mnemonic for Traditional Bases: “LTC”
Live (Domicile)
Tagging
Consent/Waiver
Mnemonic for Fair Play: “FEDS”
Forum interest
Efficiency
Defendant burdens
Social policy
Common Testing Scenarios:
Misunderstanding domicile for individuals and corporations.
Confusing purposeful availment with random or fortuitous contacts.
Applying the wrong test for internet-related contacts.
Common Mistakes:
Failing to properly analyze the “minimum contacts” and “fair play and substantial justice” prongs.
Misapplying traditional bases when a long-arm statute is specified in the fact pattern.
Venue
Venue
Rule Statement: Venue determines the proper location for a trial and is generally appropriate where any defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or under fallback rules.
Elements:
Where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same state.
Where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred.
Fallback: Where any defendant is subject to PJ, if no other venue is proper.
Mnemonic for Venue: “APES”
Any defendant resides (if all in the same state)
Personal jurisdiction fallback
Events or omissions substantially occurred
Specific rules for suits against aliens and land disputes.
Forum Non Conveniens: Court may dismiss if another court is better suited, considering public and private factors.
Pleadings and Motions
Rule Statement: Pleadings set forth claims and defenses; various motions can challenge or support the case procedurally or substantively.
Elements:
Complaint Requirements:
Jurisdictional statement
Short and plain statement of the claim showing entitlement to relief
Demand for relief
Answer: Admit, deny, or state lack of knowledge. Must include affirmative defenses.
Amendments: One amendment as a matter of course within 21 days of serving. Later amendments require consent or court approval.
Rule 11 Sanctions
Rule 11 Sanctions: Applied for filings made for improper purposes, with frivolous claims, or without factual/legal basis.
Common Testing Scenarios:
Failing to state affirmative defenses in the answer.
Incorrectly applying Rule 11 sanctions without the “safe harbor” provision.
Common Mistakes:
Failing to amend pleadings timely.
Misunderstanding the grounds for Rule 11 sanctions and how they are applied.
Discovery
Discovery
Rule Statement: Discovery allows parties to obtain information relevant to the case, limited by relevance, proportionality, and privilege.
Elements:
Forms of Discovery:
Depositions
Interrogatories
Requests to Admit
Requests to Produce
Requests for Physical/Mental Examinations
Scope of Discovery: Relevant and proportional to the needs of the case. Privileged information and work product are generally protected.
Mnemonic for Discovery Scope: “DEEP”
Duplicative (avoid)
Easier way (consider)
Enough opportunity (allow)
Privilege (respect)
Common Testing Scenarios:
Failing to respond timely to requests for admission results in admission by default.
Misunderstanding the rules around electronic discovery and the safe-harbor provision.
Common Mistakes:
Overlooking the duty to supplement disclosures.
Confusing the types of discovery and their appropriate use.
Appeals
Appeals
Rule Statement: Appeals are taken from final judgments or specific interlocutory orders, with strict standards for review.
Elements:
Final Judgment Rule: Only final decisions on the merits are appealable. Exceptions for interlocutory appeals include injunctions, partial final judgments, and certain other orders.
Standards of Review:
De Novo: Questions of law.
Clearly Erroneous: Findings of fact by the judge.
Substantial Evidence: Findings of fact by the jury.
Abuse of Discretion: Discretionary decisions by the trial court.
Mnemonic for Standards of Review: “DCSAD”
De Novo (Questions of law)
Clearly Erroneous (Judge’s findings of fact)
Substantial Evidence (Jury’s findings of fact)
Abuse of Discretion (Discretionary decisions)
Deferential Review (General deference to trial court’s judgment)
Common Testing Scenarios:
Identifying the appropriate standard of review for different types of appeals.
Distinguishing between final judgments and interlocutory orders.
Common Mistakes:
Misunderstanding which interlocutory orders are appealable.
Incorrectly applying the standards of review.
Pretrial and Trial
Pretrial and Trial
Rule Statement: Pretrial motions can dispose of claims or defenses before trial; various rules govern the conduct of trial and post-trial procedures.
Elements:
Pretrial Motions:
Motion to Dismiss: Insufficient process, service, lack of jurisdiction, or failure to state a claim.
Summary Judgment: No genuine dispute of material fact, and movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL): No legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to find for the non-movant.
Post-Trial Motions:
Renewed JMOL: Must have filed original JMOL.
Motion for New Trial: Error affecting substantial rights or newly discovered evidence.
Motion for Relief from Judgment: Mistake, new evidence, fraud, void judgment.
Common Testing Scenarios:
Misunderstanding the grounds and timing for JMOL and renewed JMOL.
Misapplying the standards for granting a new trial or relief from judgment.
Common Mistakes:
Filing post-trial motions improperly.
Confusing the standards for different types of motions.
Claim Preclusion (Res Judicata):
Claim Preclusion (Res Judicata):
Rule Statement: Prevents parties from relitigating the same claim in a future lawsuit.
Elements:
Valid, Final Judgment on the Merits
Same Parties or Their Privies
Same Claim
Mnemonic for Claim Preclusion: “VSP”
Valid final judgment
Same parties or privies
Previously litigated claim
Common Testing Scenarios:
Determining whether a claim in a second lawsuit arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the first lawsuit.
Understanding the scope of parties bound by the previous judgment.
Common Mistakes:
Confusing claim preclusion with issue preclusion.
Failing to recognize valid exceptions to claim preclusion.
Issue Preclusion (Collateral Estoppel):
Issue Preclusion (Collateral Estoppel):
Rule Statement: Prevents parties from relitigating an issue that has already been decided in a previous case.
Elements:
Valid Final Judgment on the Merits
Identical Issue Actually Litigated and Necessarily Decided
Party Against Whom Preclusion is Asserted Was a Party or in Privity
Mnemonic for Issue Preclusion: “VIP”
Valid final judgment on the merits
Identical issue litigated and necessarily decided
Party precluded was a party or in privity
Common Testing Scenarios:
Determining whether an issue in a second lawsuit was actually litigated and decided in the first lawsuit.
Understanding the concept of privity in issue preclusion.
Common Mistakes:
Misapplying the requirement of “actually litigated and necessarily decided.”
Confusing the party requirements between claim and issue preclusion.
Preliminary Injunctions and Temporary Restraining Orders (TRO)
Preliminary Injunctions and Temporary Restraining Orders (TRO)
Step One: Assess Factors for Granting Preliminary Injunction & TRO
Likelihood of success on the merits.
Irreparable harm to movant (immediate for TRO).
Harm to movant outweighs harm to non-moving party.
Injunction is in public interest.
Step Two: Assess Whether Proper Procedure Was Followed
Mnemonic for Injunctions and TROs: “LIHP”
Likelihood of success
Irreparable harm
Harm balance
Public interest
Common Testing Scenarios:
Evaluating the factors for granting preliminary injunctions and TROs.
Assessing procedural requirements for injunctions.
Common Mistakes:
Overlooking the need for immediate harm in TROs.
Misunderstanding the balance of harm analysis.
Discovery
Discovery
Discoverable information
Depositions
Electronically stored information and spoliation sanctions
Signing disclosures and sanctions for improper certification (Rule 26(g))
Initial disclosures (Rule 26(a))
Attorney work-product doctrine
Motion to Dismiss (12(b))
Motion to Dismiss (12(b))
Lack of SMJ
Lack of PJ
Improper venue
Insufficient process
Insufficient service of process
Failure to state a claim
Failure to join a necessary party
Motion for a New Trial
Motion for a New Trial
Error at trial makes judgment unfair.
New evidence that could not have been discovered with reasonable diligence.
Prejudicial misconduct by a party, attorney, or juror.
Judgment against the weight of the evidence.
Verdict is excessive or inadequate.
Mnemonic for Motions: “DJPJJ”
Mnemonic for Motions: “DJPJJ”
Dismiss (12(b))
Judgment on the pleadings
Primary summary judgment
Judgment as a matter of law (JMOL)
Judgment as a matter of law (renewed) or new trial
Mnemonic for Preclusion: “VPSS” for Claim Preclusion and “VIEF” for Issue Preclusion
Mnemonic for Preclusion: “VPSS” for Claim Preclusion and “VIEF” for Issue Preclusion
Valid final judgment
Parties identical or in privity
Same claim
Same transaction or occurrence
Valid final judgment
Identical issue
Essential and determined
Full and fair opportunity
Common Testing Scenarios:
Distinguishing between claim and issue preclusion.
Applying preclusion doctrines in multiple actions.
Common Mistakes:
Misidentifying the elements required for preclusion.
Confusing offensive and defensive issue preclusion.
Exceptions to the Final Judgment Rule:
Exceptions to the Final Judgment Rule:
Rule 54(b) exceptions
Statutory exceptions
Certified appeal exception
Collateral order doctrine
Writs of mandamus and prohibition
Pendent appellate jurisdiction
Certification of class action
Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Federal Question Jurisdiction
Claim must arise under federal law, U.S. Constitution, or U.S. Treaty.
Diversity Jurisdiction
Complete Diversity: No plaintiff shares state citizenship with any defendant.
Amount-in-Controversy: Exceeds $75,000.
Supplemental Jurisdiction
Original SMJ: Over at least one claim.
Common Nucleus: Additional state court claim must arise from the same case or controversy.
Discretion to Decline:
Novel state law issue.
State claim predominates.
Federal claims dismissed.
Exceptional circumstances.
Class Action Jurisdiction
Class Action Jurisdiction
Minimal Diversity: At least one plaintiff is diverse from one defendant.
Amount-in-Controversy: Exceeds $5 million.
Discretion to Decline.
Common Testing Scenarios:
Determining if a federal question is present on the face of a complaint.
Evaluating complete diversity at the time of filing.
Applying the discretionary factors for supplemental jurisdiction.
Understanding minimal diversity and amount-in-controversy for class actions.
Common Mistakes:
Confusing the timing for determining diversity jurisdiction.
Misunderstanding the aggregation of claims for the amount in controversy.
Overlooking discretionary factors for supplemental jurisdiction.
Motion to Dismiss (12(b)):
Motion to Dismiss (12(b)):
Lack of SMJ.
Lack of PJ.
Improper venue.
Insufficient process.
Insufficient service of process.
Failure to state a claim.
Failure to join a necessary party.
Waiver: Some defenses must be raised at the first opportunity or they are waived.
Mnemonic for Motions to Dismiss: “SIP SSVF”
SMJ (Lack of)
Insufficient process
PJ (Lack of)
Service of process (Insufficient)
State a claim (Failure to)
Venue (Improper)
Failure to join a necessary party
Common Testing Scenarios:
Identifying grounds for dismissal.
Understanding waiver of defenses.
Common Mistakes:
Misapplying the rules for waiver of defenses.
Overlooking proper grounds for a motion to dismiss.
Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
Can be filed after the pleadings are closed but early enough not to delay trial.
Non-Waivable Grounds: Lack of SMJ, failure to state a claim, failure to join a necessary party.
Motion for Summary Judgment
Motion for Summary Judgment
No genuine issue of material fact and movant entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Must be supported by evidence from the record.
Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL)
Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL)
Non-moving party fully heard on issue during trial, and court finds reasonable jury has no legally sufficient basis to rule in favor of non-moving party.
Renewed JMOL: Must be filed within 28 days after the entry of judgment.
Motion for a New Trial
Motion for a New Trial
Error at trial makes judgment unfair.
New evidence that could not have been discovered with reasonable diligence.
Prejudicial misconduct by a party, attorney, or juror.
Judgment against the weight of the evidence.
Verdict is excessive or inadequate.
Common Testing Scenarios:
Determining grounds for summary judgment.
Understanding the timing and requirements for JMOL and renewed JMOL.
Evaluating grounds for a new trial.
Common Mistakes:
Confusing the standards for different motions.
Misunderstanding the timing for filing JMOL and renewed JMOL.
What is the time limit for filing a Default Judgment?
What is the time limit for filing a Default Judgment?
Back:
7 Days
Common Pitfalls:
Failing to monitor court calendars closely can result in missed default judgments.
What are the 14-Day Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
Mnemonic: “TRADIS”
TRO (Temporary Restraining Order): Maximum duration unless extended.
Response after pre-answer motion denied.
Amended pleading response.
Discovery plan & initial disclosures after initial conference.
Impleader: File third-party complaint without leave after the original answer is served.
Scheduling order initial conference.
Common Pitfalls:
Missing the deadline for demanding a jury trial or responding to amended pleadings can result in waiving the right to a jury trial or leaving pleadings unanswered.
What are the 21-Day Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
Mnemonic: “AAARPS”
Amend pleading as a matter of course after pleading was served.
Answer complaint: Serve pre-answer motion or answer after service of the complaint, counterclaim, or crossclaim.
Amend & Supplement pleadings.
Reply to counterclaim.
Pre-answer motion or answer after service.
Serve reply to answer.
Common Pitfalls:
Failing to file pre-answer motions or amend pleadings within this timeframe can result in procedural disadvantages.
What are the 28-Day Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
What are the 28-Day Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
Back:
Mnemonic: “28 RAN”
Renewed JMOL: File after the entry of judgment.
Amended findings: File within 28 days after the entry of judgment.
New trial motion: File within 28 days after the entry of judgment.
Common Pitfalls:
Not renewing a JMOL motion or filing for a new trial within the 28-day period can result in the loss of these post-trial remedies.
What are the 30-Day Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
What are the 30-Day Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
Back:
Mnemonic: “DRAIN MARS”
Disclosures (initial): Submit within 30 days after the initial conference.
Removal or Remand (Notice): File within 30 days after receipt of the initial pleading or within 30 days of notice of removal.
Admissions (Request): Respond within 30 days of being served.
Interrogatories and Requests for Production.
Notice of Appeal: File notice of appeal within 30 days of the entry of judgment.
MSJ after close of discovery.
Answer after service of process waiver.
Removal after initial pleading receipt.
Submit pretrial disclosures before trial.
Common Pitfalls:
Missing the deadline for removal or failing to respond to requests for admissions can result in critical admissions by default or improper venue retention.
What are the 60-Day Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
What are the 60-Day Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
Back:
Mnemonic: “WASP”
Waiver of Service (Answer): File answer or pre-answer motion within 60 days after waiver of service was mailed domestically.
Agency/Employee (US): Serve answer after service of process on U.S. agency or employee.
Service Waiver Answer.
Process Answer after Waiver.
Common Pitfalls:
Not responding within 60 days after waiving service can lead to default judgments.
What are the 90-Day Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
What are the 90-Day Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
Back:
Mnemonic: “SERVED EXPERT”
Serve process after the complaint is filed.
Expert witness materials disclosed before trial.
Common Pitfalls:
Failing to serve process within 90 days can result in dismissal of the case.
What are the 1 Year Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
What are the 1 Year Deadlines in Civil Procedure?
Back:
Mnemonic: “DIVERSITY RELIEF”
Diversity: Removal based on diversity jurisdiction must be filed within one year of the commencement of the action.
Relief from Judgment: Must be filed within a year from the entry of judgment for reasons like mistake, newly discovered evidence, or fraud.
Common Pitfalls:
Missing the one-year deadline for removal based on diversity or filing for relief from judgment can result in jurisdictional issues or inability to correct judgments.
