MBE questions Flashcards
Q 25
Motions for SJ should be granted when
there is no dispute of material fact
are third party D claims against a P complusory?
no
wil fed ct hear a child custody case when there is diversity + AICover$75k
No, because federal courts will not exercise subject matter jurisdiction over child support and other domestic relations claims even if the requirements for diversity of citizenship jurisdiction are met.
Venue in this case (a diversity case) would be proper in a judicial district in which
- (i) any defendant resides, if all reside in the same state or
- a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred
Absent a court order or stipulation to the contrary, what is the maximum amount of time that one deposition may take?
One seven-hour day
In an in rem action, persons whose interests are known to be affected and whose addresses are known must be notified at least by ordinary mail
If a case filed in state court contains a claim that would arise under federal law, and it is joined with state law claims that do not invoke diversity or supplemental jurisdiction, the entire case can be removed to federal court.
Once that is done, the state law claims are:
severed and remanded to state court by the federal court.
Federal question jurisdiction arises merely from the fact that a corporate party was incorporated by Congress if the United States owns __________ the corporation’s capital stock.
more than 50%
In state court and frequently in federal court (absent consent or waiver), personal jurisdiction is limited by:
State statutes and DPC
An admission made pursuant to a request for admissions is an admission for the purpose of the pending action only; it may not be used against the party who made it in any other proceedin
No time limit on when a supplemental pleading can be filed.
Service need not comply with state law…
meaning that if a State law restricts who can be served, service may still be proper under FRC
A third-party defendant may assert a claim against the original plaintiff only if the claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence that is the subject of the plaintiff’s original claims
The entry of the default cuts off the defendant’s right to contest the case on the merits. Although the defendant may appear at the hearing for the default judgment to contest damages, he may not contest liability until the entry of default is vacated.
right to demand a jury trial will expire 14 days after P is served with D’s answer
There is no timing specified in the federal rules for withdrawing a jury demand, but a jury demand can be withdrawn only with the consent of all the parties. The 14-day period represents the general time period for initially demanding a jury.
a trial judge cannot order a new trial merely for disagreeing with the jury’s award; she must believe it is so excessive as to shock the conscience.
In federal court, an amendment to a complaint “relates back” to the date the complaint was filed when the new claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the original claim.
a United States citizen without a state citizenship is NOT AN ALIEN.
A United States citizen may become a citizen of a foreign country by renouncing her United States citizenship and acquiring the citizenship or nationality of the foreign country by a formal process called naturalization.
A party may request a physical or mental exam only of another party …. (so this means no witnesses)
….when that party’s physical or mental condition is in controversy. The exam must be ordered by the court on a showing of good cause.
The court on motion may permit a plaintiff to file a supplemental pleading that relates to matters occurring after the date of the original pleading.
A party is under a duty to amend a prior response/interrogatory if he knows that the response, though correct when made, is no longer true and the circumstances are such that a failure to amend the response is in substance a knowing concealment.
Discovery
An employee filed an employment discrimination action against her employer in federal district court. The employee alleges that she has not been promoted because of her gender. She intends to call a co-worker as a witness at trial. The co-worker will testify that a senior manager of the employer told the co-worker that the employee would not be promoted because the employer deemed women to be poor managers.
Is the identity of the co-worker subject to discovery by the employer?
A Yes, the employee must disclose the identity of the co-worker, but only if the employer asks for the information in appropriate discovery requests.
B Yes, the employee must disclose the identity of the co-worker, but only as a pretrial disclosure 30 days before trial.
C Yes, the employee must disclose the identity of the co-worker even without any request from the employer.
D No, the co-worker’s identity and her testimony consist of trial preparation materials and are subject to qualified immunity from discovery.
C Yes, the employee must disclose the identity of the co-worker even without any request from the employer.
As an initial disclosure, a party must provide the names of individuals likely to have discoverable information that the disclosing party may use to support its claims or defenses
Venue
A plaintiff filed a negligence action against two defendants in federal district court, invoking the court’s diversity of citizenship jurisdiction. Prior to serving their answers, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court denied the motion, concluding that subject matter jurisdiction was proper. The defendants then filed their answers responding to the merits of the complaint and denying negligence. The defendants’ answers also contained motions to dismiss the action for lack of personal jurisdiction. Five weeks later, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the action for improper venue.
If the court determines that venue in fact is improper, how should the court rule on the defendants’ venue motion?
A The court should dismiss the action for improper venue.
B The court should deny the venue motion, because objections to venue are waived if a defendant objects to personal jurisdiction without at the same time objecting to venue, since personal jurisdiction and venue are closely related.
C The court should deny the venue motion, because the defendants waived any objection to venue when they did not raise the objection in their pre-answer motion objecting to subject matter jurisdiction.
D The court should deny the venue motion, because the defendants waived any objection to venue when they did not raise the objection in their answers.
C The court should deny the venue motion, because the defendants waived any objection to venue when they did not raise the objection in their pre-answer motion objecting to subject matter jurisdiction.
Objections to venue are waived if not asserted in the defendants’ first response to the complaint-whether that first response is the answer or a Rule 12(b) pre-answer motion
A defendant does not have to object to personal jurisdiction and venue together.
AIC
A seller entered a written contract to sell certain equipment to a buyer in another state for $110,000. The seller purposely breached the contract because someone else offered more money for the equipment. The buyer was able to buy similar equipment from another source, but the price was $170,000. The buyer filed a breach of contract action against the seller in federal district court. The complaint seeks $60,000 in compensatory damages and an additional $60,000 in punitive damages on grounds that the breach was purposeful. Applicable state law is well established that punitive damages may not be awarded for breach of contract.
Does the federal court have subject matter jurisdiction over the action?
A No, because punitive damage claims are not counted in evaluating the amount in controversy requirement.
B No, because it is clear to a legal certainty that the amount recoverable does not exceed $75,000.
C Yes, because the amounts of all the seller’s claims are aggregated for purposes of the amount in controversy requirement, so his claims exceed $75,000.
D Yes, because the transaction is between citizens of different states and involves interstate commerce.
B No, because it is clear to a legal certainty that the amount recoverable does not exceed $75,000.
Here, state law definitively establishes that punitive damages may not be awarded in breach of contract cases. Thus, there is no legal tenable basis for claiming $60,000 in punitive damages, making the true amount in controversy $60,000, below the $75,000 AIC requirement.