Final Exam - Case Law

Question 1

Mathews Test

Answer 1

1) State interest
2) Private interest
3) Risk of error/cost of additional procedure

Used for due process concerns.

Question 2

Conley Test

Answer 2

Standard for notice pleading - Rule 8 type of pleading (can be bare bones!) is sufficient notice to provide to defendants and comport with views of DP

Question 3

Expresio Unius

Answer 3

If a rule doesn’t express it, it does not apply (think Rule 8 v. Rule 9)

Question 4

United Coin Test

Answer 4

For good cause on default entry.

1) Intent to defend on the merits - meritorious defense.
2) Non-prejudicial to plaintiff.
3) Did the defendant purposely act wrongly - culpability.

Question 5

Bose Test

Answer 5

If the same evidence is used for a claim and counterclaim, then the counterclaim is compulsory.

Question 6

Res judicata

Answer 6

1) Could this claim have been raised in the prior action?

2) Did the parties have their day in court?

Question 7

Taylor Exceptions

Answer 7

C- Consent
L- legal relationship (think property)
A-adequate representative
A-assumption of control of the litigation (think subrogation)
P-proxy
S-special statutory scheme preventing preclusion (e.g., probate)

Question 8

Camacho Rule 19 Test

Answer 8

1) Necessity?
2) Feasibility of joinder? (is there SMJ)
3) Permissible to proceed without the party?
4) Is the party indispensable?

If no jdx and indispensable –> dismissal.

Question 9

Stringfellow Doctrine

Answer 9

Concerns intervention
Allowance to let a party in on a limited basis; doesn’t make sense to let a party intervene unless there is sufficient interest in the whole / majority of the claim, not one part.

Question 10

NRDC Intervenor Test

Answer 10

1) Is there a significantly protectable interest?
2) Would decision of the case practically impair the ability to protect the interest?
3) Is the party seeking to intervene already represented by another party in the litigation?

Question 11

Adickes Standard for SJ

Answer 11

Movant has full burden of proof and burden of production

Question 12

Currie Standard for SJ

Answer 12

Movant has full burden of proof and no burden of production (equivalent to trial burden)

Question 13

Louis Standard for SJ

Answer 13

Used in practice.

Movant has full burden of proof and limited burden of production (50%).

1) Affirmative evidence negating an essential part of the claim
2) Review of the evidence in the record to show non-movant’s claim is not supported by the facts –> rule 56

Question 14

SJ Trilogy (1986)

Answer 14

1) Celotex- lowered the burden of getting to SJ
2) Anderson- clarifies SJ use with sensitive topics, focusing on public policy issues and ensuring that there is justification to go to trial
3) Matsushita- plausibility of plaintiff’s case and the alternatives

Question 15

Markman Test

Answer 15

Need for consistency of interpretation will move the factual review into the judge’s hands and out of the jury

Question 16

Pennoyer Test

Answer 16

1) Domiciliary
2) In-state service
3) Consent

Question 17

International Shoe

Answer 17

1) Minimum contacts (systematic and continuous)
2) FPSJ
a. Inconvenience to P
b. Inconvenience to D
c. State’s interest
d. Justice interest

“nerve center” of the defendant for MC

Question 18

McGee

Answer 18

1) MC only
+FPSJ, but FPSJ does not need to be satisfied in order to get to PJdx (bc Brennan)

Beginning of the long-arm statutes

Stream of commerce

Question 19

WWVW

Answer 19

1) MC - transactionally related minimum
2) Purposeful availment of the forum by the defendant
3) FPSJ

Question 20

Issues of purposeful availment

Answer 20

1) Does not consider plaintiff
2) Regulatory mismatch between states
3) No comparison to available forums

Question 21

Calder

Answer 21

1) Effects test (MC + defendant is liable where the effects are felt)

Question 22

Asahi

Answer 22

1) MC - IIA, NOT law.
2) Due Process - IIB, controlling.
+Basically FPSJ
a. Burden on defendant
b. Interest of plaintiff
3. Forum state interest
4. Systematic efficiency

Trivialization of MC to focus on FPSJ – chattel jdx, commercial relations.

Question 23

McIntyre

Answer 23

1) Minimum contacts (systematic and continuous) / purposeful availment
2) Disregard of FPSJ

Weird idea of general jdx in the U.S., but not in a particular forum.. plaintiff cannot recover

Question 24

Burnham

Answer 24

Pennoyer redux - in-state service on an out of state resident

Question 25

Shaffer (1977)

Answer 25

Int’l Shoe is displacing Pennoyer

Question 26

Zippo Test

Answer 26

For internet jdx

1) the defendant must have sufficient minimum contacts with the forum state
2) the claim asserted against the defendant must arise out of those contacts
3) the exercise of jurisdiction must be reasonable.

More specifically,

1) Active website v. passive website
2) intentional actions targeting the forum
3) express aim
4) cause of harm

Question 27

Goodyear / Daimler AG Test

Answer 27

1) Is the defendant at home?

2) Are there MC - continuous and systematic contacts?

Question 28

BMS test

Answer 28

1) MC + Due process for the state entities

2) FPSJ, mostly focusing on the state interest in not having California litigate its claims

Question 29

Ford Test

Answer 29

WWVW redux

1) MC - transactionally related minimum - what did the plaintiff do?
2) Defendant purposeful availment
3) FPSJ

Also suggests return to Pennoyer

Question 30

Mottley Test

Answer 30

• Also called the Holmes Test

- Four corners of the complaint - is the federal claim expressly there?

Question 31

Merrell Dow Test / Implied Right of Action

Answer 31

1) Is the plaintiff part of a class for whose benefit the statute was passed?
2) Is there evidence of legislative intent to either create or not create a cause of action?
3) Would a federal cause of action further the underlying purpose of the law?
4) Is this typically the subject for state law?

Question 32

Grable/Gunn Test / Federal Interest

Answer 32

1) Is the state claim resolution indispensable to the federal resolution?
2) Is the federal part of the claim substantial?
3) Is federal law balkanized?
4) Discretion/policy

Question 33

Gibbs Test

Answer 33

1) Do the state and federal claims derive from the CNOF?
2) Are the federal issues substantial?
3) Do the federal issues predominate? (comprehensive scheme)
4) Is it one constitutional case?
5) Discretion

Question 34

Erie Aims

Answer 34

1) Eliminate forum shopping

2) Eliminate inequitable distribution of law

Question 35

York Test

Answer 35

Outcome-Determinative:

1) Would the result be substantially the same if it was tried in federal vs. state court?

Question 36

Warren Test

Answer 36

1. Rule on point? –> Does it conflict with state law? –> Is it within the scope of the REA?

Question 37

Harlan Test

Answer 37

1) Twin aims of Erie

2) ex-post vs. ex-ante assessment of behavior

Question 38

Gasperini Test

Answer 38

Outcome-Affective:

1) Is there a rule on point?
2) Is there conflict with state law?
3) Is the REA controlling?