MEE - Civ Pro Flashcards
*What is subject matter jurisdiction, and what are its two main types?
Subject matter jurisdiction is the power of the federal courts to hear a certain kind of case. The two main types are diversity of citizenship jurisdiction and federal question jurisdiction.
*What are the requirements for diversity of citizenship jurisdiction?
Diversity of citizenship jurisdiction requires complete diversity of citizenship between the plaintiffs and defendants and that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
For diversity purposes, a corporation is a citizen of every state in which it is incorporated and the one state in which it has a principal place of business. The corporations principal place of business is the place from which the corporation’s high-level officers direct and control the corporation’s activities.
For diversity purposes, an individual is a citizen of the state in which they are domiciled. A party’s domicile may be changed by being physically present in the state coupled with the intent to remain there permanently or for an indefinite period.
For diversity purposes, an executor of an estate, is considered to domicile in the same place as the decedent. For trusts, the domicile of the trustee is used.
The P’s good faith allegation in the compliant determines the amount in controversy.
How is a citizen of a foreign country treated for diversity purposes?
A citizen of a foreign country who has been admitted to the U.S. as a permanent resident is treated as a citizen of the state in which they are domiciled.
*What is required for federal question jurisdiction?
Federal question jurisdiction exists when the plaintiff’s well-pleaded compliant sets forth a claim that arises under federal law. Federal defenses - whether set out in the defendant’s answer or in the plaintiff’s complaint in anticipation of the defendant’s answer - are irrelevant.
*What is supplemental jurisdiction?
Supplemental jurisdiction allows a federal court with subject matter jurisdiction over a case to hear additional state law claims if those claims arise from a common nucleus of operative fact. However, plaintiffs cannot add claims against non-diverse parties if the sole basis for subject matter jurisdiction is diversity.
Plaintiff may be prohibited from asserting SJ against impleaded parties, compulsorily joined parties, permissively joined parties, and intervening parties. This does not mean that a permissively joined party may not us SJ against another party.
What is the rule for counterclaims in relation to the amount in controversy?
A counterclaim does not have to meet the $75,000 requirement if it is compulsory, meaning it arises out of the same transaction or occurrence.
*What is the statutory basis for personal jurisdiction?
Must be authorized by state statute. A federal court must analyze PJ issues as if it were a state court in the jurisdiction. When the long arm statute is the maximum allowed under the constitution, the statute and the constitution merge together.
*What is the constitutional basis for personal jurisdiction?
Personal jurisdiction is constitutional if the defendant has engaged in such minimum contacts with the state that it would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. The court considers whether the defendant has purposely availed himself of that state’s jurisdiction, and whether the defendant could reasonably anticipate being haled into the state’s courts
Specific personal jurisdiction: If the cause of action arises from or relates to the defendant’s contact with the forum, Specific PJ exists.
General personal jurisdiction: If Specific PJ does not exist, then it may exist if the defendant consents to or is “at home” in the state.
*What is the general rule for the scope of discovery?
Discovery is generally permitted with regard to any non-privileged matter relevant to any party’s claim or defense including the identity of persons having knowledge of relevant facts. The information need not be admissible in evidence to be discoverable; it just has to be relevant.
The costs of discovery and the needs of the case will also be considered.
*What is the work product doctrine?
In discovery, the work product doctrine protects documents and tangible things prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or its representative from discovery. However, such materials can be discovered if the party shows a substantial need for them and cannot obtain their substantial equivalent by other means.
What are the different methods of discovery?
The different methods of discovery include oral depositions, written depositions, interrogatories, requests for production and inspection of documents and land, physical and mental examinations, and requests for admission.
What are the limits and rules for oral depositions?
Oral depositions are limited to 10 per side unless the court allows more, each limited to one day of seven hours. Questions are asked and answered orally and under oath.
What are interrogatories, and what are their limitations?
Interrogatories are written questions that must be answered under oath in writing. They are limited to 25 per party unless the court allows more, and responses are required within 30 days.
When can physical and mental examinations be ordered?
Physical and mental examinations can be ordered only against a party when their physical or mental condition is in controversy and only for good cause shown.
**What happens if a party fails to preserve electronically stored information?
Once litigation is reasonably foreseeable, a party must take reasonable steps to preserve the ESI.
If a party fails to preserve electronically stored information that should have been preserved and it cannot be restored or replaced, the court may order sanctions against the wrongful party, which could include presuming the lost information was unfavorable, instructing the jury to presume the information was unfavorable, or dismissing the action or entering a default judgment.
What must be included in a pretrial statement?
A pretrial statement must include the claims and defenses, itemization of damages, requests for stipulations and admissions, and a list of all witnesses and exhibits.
*What is the doctrine of claim preclusion (res judicata)?
For claim preclusion to apply, (1) there must have been a valid, final judgment on the merits, (2) both parties must be the same (or be in privity with a party in the prior suite), and (3) the new action must involve the same cause of action (Must arise out of the same transaction or occurrence).
*What is the doctrine of issue preclusion (collateral estoppel)?
Under the traditional mutuality rule, because an earlier judgment cannot be used against a person who was not a party, that person is similarly barred from taking advantage of the judgment. However there is an exception: For issue preclusion to apply (1) the issues in both actions must be the same, (2) there must have been a final judgment as to that issue, (3) The party against whom collateral estoppel is asserted must have had a fair opportunity to be heard on the matter, and (4) the posture of the case must be such that it would not be unfair or inequitable to apply collateral estoppel.
Nonmutual defensive issue preclusion is generally allowed. When Defendant was not a party in case 1, but uses the judgment in case 1 in case 2 as a defense to prevent plaintiff from suing.
Nonmutual offensive issue preclusion is more complicated and requires an analysis of various fairness factors to the defendant. The most common factor is whether there have been no inconsistent findings from courts on the issue. If there have been inconsistent findings, it would be unfair to allow nonmutual offensive issue preclusion.
Judgments by settlement do not have issue preclusive effect because settlements typically do not contain admissions and do not involve an actual judgment on the issue.
*What are the requirements for a case to be removed to federal court?
The first step in removal is to file a notice with the federal district court and division in which the action is pending. Copies of the notice must be sent to the opposing parties and to the state court. The notice must contain the grounds for removal. If notice for removal is due to the establishment of diversity, the action may not be removed from state court if one year has passed since filing complaint unless bad faith by plaintiff can be shown.
The defendant may remove a case to federal court if the federal court has subject matter jurisdiction, all defendants agree, no defendant is a resident of the forum state (if based on diversity), and removal notice is filed within 30 days of service of summons and complaint.
When a case is removed from state court to federal court, venue is set in the federal district court that embraces the state court in which the action was pending.
**How does one determine proper venue?
Venue is proper in a judicial district in which (1) any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the state in which the district is located, (2) a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated; or (3) any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such action, if there is no such district then (4) anywhere within the United States satisfies (1) or (2).
*What law applies when a party moves to transfer the case?
To transfer venue, the court must determine whether venue has been properly laid, and, if so, whether any basis for transfer of venue exists.
If venue was proper the case may be transferred: (1) for the convenience of the parties or witnesses, (2) to another venue in which the action might have been brought, or (3) to another venue to which the parties have consented.
Under the Erie Doctrine, a federal court sitting in diversity must apply substantive state law, but will apply federal procedural law. If there is a federal directive on point, such as a federal rule of procedure or a federal statute, and it is valid, it will be applied.
If venue was proper, the court to which the action is transferred must apply the law of the state of the transferor court, including that state’s rules regarding choice of law rules. Otherwise, the transferee court applies the law of the transferee court.
Forum selection Clauses: If venue in the original action is proper, the federal court, in the interests of justice, may transfer the case for the convenience of the parties and witnesses to another venue in which the action might have been brought (considering the rules for V, PJ, and SMJ) or to which the parties have consented. The transferee court will apply the laws of the forum selected by the parties.
When the parties have agreed to a valid forum selection clause, a district court should ordinarily transfer the case to the forum specified in that clause. Only in extraordinary circumstances will the court be allowed to deny transfer to a venue agreed to by the parties. The court will make this determination on the basis of public interest factors alone. The public interest factors include (1) what law applies, (2) what community should be burdened with jury service, and (3) desire to keep local action local. These factors will rarely result in denial of a chosen forum by the parties.
When should a federal court apply state law?
A federal court should apply state law for substantive issues that govern conduct (e.g., burdens of proof, statutes of limitations, permissible defenses) and follow federal procedural law (e.g., timing requirements).
**What are the requirements for intervention as of right?
Under Rule 24, a nonparty has the right to intervene if they have an interest in the subject matter of the action, the disposition of the action may impair their interests, and their interest is not adequately represented by existing parties.
*What is permissive joinder, and when is it allowed?
Parties may be permissively joined as plaintiffs or be joined as defendants whenever: (1) some claim is made by each plaintiff and against each defendant relating to or arising out of the same series of occurrences; and (2) There is a common question of law or fact among all the parties.
Must be pleaded or it is barred.
**What is compulsory joinder?
The determination of whether a party must be joined is a three-step process: (1) whether the party should be joined; (2) if the party should be joined, whether its feasible to join the party and (3) if the party should be joined and joinder is feasible, whether the party must be joined.
As the first step (1), the court must determine if the party should (not must) be joined. Such a party is sometimes called a necessary party. A party should be joined if: (A) complete relief cannot be given to the existing parties in their absence; (B) the disposition in the party’s absence may impair the absent party’s ability to protect her interest in the controversy; or (3) the party’s absence would expose existing parties to a substantial risk of double or inconsistent obligations.
If a party is not a necessary party the analysis of the second two steps is required. (2) if the party should be joined, the court next must determine if it is feasible to join the party (determine if the joinder of the party would destroy venue or jurisdiction), and (3) if the party should be joined and their presence would not be feasible, the court lastly must decide whether the party must be joined. (whether the court must dismiss the action or whether it can proceed without the absent party, looking at such factors as the prejudice to both the present and absent parties, whether judgment can be shaped to avoid such prejudice, whether the judgment will be adequate without the absent party and whether the plaintiff will be deprived of an adequate remedy if the action were to be dismissed. If the court determines that it must dismiss the action, the absent party is sometimes called a necessary and indispensable party.
