Mid-Term Definitions Flashcards
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Defenses raised by the defendant to limit or excuse liability for the Plaintiff’s loss or they are waived.
Common Affirmative Defenses
The most common affirmative defenses are statute of limitations, laches, collateral estoppel, and res judicata
Choice of Law
in diversity cases, Federal Court uses the law of the state that first acquires SPV to determine which state’s law is the substantive law used to resolve that action.
Class Action
a group of people too numerous for joinder injured as a result of a common question of fact or law collectively sues to obtain relief. Representative must adequately represent the interest of all class members and the injury must be fair and typical of the claimed injury.
COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL (issues) and RES JUDICATA (claims)
issues and claims respectively in an adjudicated matter have been fully and fairly litigated judgment is final, and that decision is binding on the parties and their privy.
CONCURRENT JURISDICTION
an action can be filed in either a state or a federal court.
COUNTERCLAIMS and CROSS-CLAIMS
claims filed after the complaint pursuant to Rule 13 for relief either by the defendant (counterclaims) or a co-party (crossclaims).
DAMAGES
Losses the plaintiff suffers caused by the defendant’s actions designed to put the plaintiff in the position he would have been but for the defendant’s actions. General and special damages are designed to compensate the plaintiff for financial losses while punitive damages are awarded in rare cases to punish the defendant.
DISCOVERY
obtaining information that is proportional and relevant to the lawsuit that is not otherwise privileged.
Compensatory Damages
to put the nonbreaching party in the position she would have been in had the promise been performed so far as money can do this.
Punitive Damages
those damages designed to punish and deter a party from future wrongdoing.
DIVERSITY JURISDICTION
Federal Courts have jurisdiction over controversies involving state law claims if there is complete diversity of citizenship between all defendants and plaintiffs and the claim is likely to exceed $75,000.00.
DUE PROCESS
a defendant must receive notice reasonably calculated to apprise them of the action and the opportunity to be heard prior to the award of any judgment.
ESTOPPEL
a position has been taken earlier upon which the opposition has relied and therefore you are bound to that earlier position.
EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION
the action can be filed in only one.
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
a court order by a judge to act or refrain from acting.
What is needed for Injunctive Relief
1) irreparable injury if order isn’t granted; (2) threatened injury outweighs the harm to opposing party resulting from the order; (3) the injunction is not averse to public interest; and (4) the moving party will succeed on the merits.
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW
tests whether a reasonable jury based on the evidence submitted could find for the other side.
NOTICE PLEADING
requires the Plaintiff to merely put the other side on notice of the facts of the claim and establish prima facie showing that there has been a legal violation.
OUTCOME DETERMINATIVE TEST
since diversity suits use state law, results in diversity suits should be the same as they would be in the state court hearing that same matter unless there is a federal rule of civil procedure directly on point or where an important federal right is at stake.
PERSONAL JURISDICTION
the power of the court to bind the Defendant to any judgment it renders based upon the Defendant’s minimum contacts. General jurisdiction requires the Defendant to be essentially at home while Specific jurisdiction requires that the Defendant’s minimum contacts give rise to the cause of action or relate to the cause of action in a meaningful way. The Defendant acquiesces to the exercise of personal jurisdiction by failing to raise the issue.
MINIMUM CONTACTS
A nonresident defendant’s connections with the forum state (i.e., the state where the lawsuit is brought) that are sufficient for jurisdiction over that defendant to be proper. Lack of minimum contacts violates the nonresident defendant’s constitutional right to due process and “offends traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice”
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
usual civil standard of proof that requires the claimant to tip the scale ever so slightly in its favor…is it more likely true than not true?
REMOVAL JURISDICTION
Defendant has the right to remove an action from a state court to a Federal Court if the action could have otherwise been brought in Federal Court unless removal is based upon diversity and then the Defendant cannot be from that forum