MBE Rules Flashcards
What choice of law rules does a federal court apply when sitting in diversity jurisdiction?
Choice of law rules are considered substantive for Erie purposes, so a federal court presiding over a diversity case must follow the choice of law rules for the state in which it sits. Klaxon v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co., U.S. (1941).
What are the requirements under the collateral order doctrine?
Generally, only final orders are reviewable on appeal. A final order disposes of the entire case on the merits of the case, rendering a final judgment as to all parties and causes of action involved.
The collateral order doctrine is an exception to the general rule, which allows a claim or issue to be immediately appealable if:
(i) the lower court must have conclusively determined the disputed question;
(ii) the issue must be separate from and collateral to the merits of the main issue of the case; AND
(iii) the issue must be effectively unreviewable on an appeal from the final judgment.
What is the standard of review when a trial court reduces a punitive damages award on the grounds that it is unconstitutionally excessive?
The appellate court will review the trial court’s decision de novo.
What is required for a valid agency relationship under the Equal Dignities Rule (ie., authority/requirements of an agent to perform all acts authorized by a principle)?
Under the equal dignities rule, when the act performed by an agent is required by law to be in writing, an agent can perform acts for the principal only if the agent’s authority is set forth in writing.
What is the extent of board members/homeowners association members for torts occurring on or caused by the commonly held property?
Typically, members of the board and members of the association are not jointly and severally liable for torts that occur on or are caused by the commonly held property. However, they may be liable for their proportionate share of the homeowner association’s liability as determined by their share of liability for common expenses.
Constructive adverse possession
Under constructive adverse poss. doctrine, a possessor who enters under color of title (ie., an instrument creating the possibility of a title in the grantee who enters under the instrument) and the possessor takes possession of only a portion of the land described in the instrument, he will be deemed to have constructively possessed the portion of the described land that he didn’t actually possess.
Remember: still must satisfy statutory period.
Warranties: Covenant of Seisin (basically same as right to covey)
a covenant of seisin is a covenant that the conveying grantor owns the land, both in quantity and quality, which such grantor purports to convey.
When does COA for adverse possession accrue?
COA for adverse possession accrues from the time that the wrongful act of possession occurs.
Rule of Aggregation for Adverse Possession - Privity
When multiple adverse possessors are in privity with one another, the period of their possessions can be aggregated to determine whether the statutory period has run against the holder of the COA.
Privity can occur through voluntary transfer, descent under intestacy laws, or testamentary succession (bequeath by will).
Adverse possession elements
Possessory act(s) must be (1) actual, (2) open and notorious, (3) exclusive, (4) continuous, and (5) hostile and under a claim of right.
To be actual, acts must be consistent with how reasonable landowner would’ve used it in possession.
To be open and notorious, the act must be sufficient to put an owner on notice of adverse possession if they inspected the land.
To be hostile, the majority view is that it is sufficient that the possessor is on land without permission. Minority view requires good faith belief by the possessor that she has good title. Another minority view is that possessor must believe that she does not have good title. Most courts, ie., majority, hold that lack of permission is enough.
When does an easement survive adverse possession?
Generally, adverse possessor takes title of property that is no greater than the previous owner had. So, if it is subject to an easement before AP, the adverse possessor will take subject to the easement.
Adverse possessor cannot claim to have adversely possessed the easement unless their possession interfered with the rights of the easement holder (ex: utility company), giving the easement holder a COA against adverse possessor while they were in possession.
What is required for Plaintiffs to join claims?
Rule 20. Permissive Joinder of Parties
Primary tabs
(a) Persons Who May Join or Be Joined.
(1) Plaintiffs. Persons may join in one action as plaintiffs if:
(A) they assert any right to relief jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences; and
(B) any question of law or fact common to all plaintiffs will arise in the action.
What constitutes a compulsory counterclaim under FRCP?
A compulsory counterclaim is a claim made by a defendant against a plaintiff that arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the plaintiff’s claim. The claim is compulsory in this situation in that it must be raised in the defendant’s answer, or it is waived.
What are the double jeopardy exception requirements when a criminal defendant requests a mistrial?
As a general rule, the right to be free of double jeopardy for the same offense bars a retrial for the same offense once jeopardy has attached in the first trial. However, one of the exceptions permitting retrial even if jeopardy has attached is when a mistrial is granted in the first trial at the request of the defendant on any ground not constituting an acquittal on the merits.
What are the requirements for an exception to the warrant requirement based on consent?
One such category is searches conducted pursuant to consent. To fall within this exception to the warrant requirement, consent must be given by one who appears to have an apparent right to use or occupy the premises and the search cannot go beyond the scope of the consent given. The consent is valid as long as the police reasonably believed that the person who gave the consent had the authority to do so, and the scope of the consent is limited only to areas to which a reasonable person under the circumstances would believe it extends.
