Pjx Smjx Venue Flashcards
COMPLETE DIVERSITY RULE
What is the complete diversity rule?
Natural Person Citizenship= domicile
STATE of Domicile (must be a US Citizen or Perm Res.)
DOMICILE = presencein the state at some pointPLUSintent (subjective)to make that state your permanent or fixed home
→ NOTE: A person who is in the middle of a move has established their domicile in the new location by having arrived there (cannot be “in travel” and by having the intent to remain permanently)
→ NOTE: for intent the court looks at factors such as taking a job, buying a house, joining civic organizations, registering to vote, qualifying for in state tuition
Corporation Citizenship= state where “at home”
The corporation must be “at home”
The corporation is “at home” if either of the following 2 connections exist:
1. The state of incorporation;
OR
2. The state of the principal place of business
—————
Unincorporated associations (partnerships, etc) = domicile of ALL states of constituent members/partners
US citizen domiciled abroad - NOT a citizen of a state (NO diversity w/ US citizen; NO alienage)
NO: π (US citizen domicile in Canada) vs. ∆ (citizen of France)
Decedents, minors, and incompetents - such persons must sue or be sued through a representative.
The representative’s citizenship IS irrelevant
NOTE: Parties must be diverse WHEN THE CLAIM is FILED
IRRELEVANT if not diverse when issue arose
IRRELEVANT if parties are not diverse AFTER case is filed
AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY
What is the necessary amount in controversy AND how do you calculate the amount?
You need AT LEAST $75,000.01
$75,000.00 WILL NOT MEET THE $$ Minmum
AMOUNT CANNOT include INTEREST or LITIGATION COSTS BUT…it is okay if the claim itself is to recover interest or litigation costs and that claim exceeds $75K
Amount will be valid if established in good faith unless it is “clear to a legal certainty” that P cannot recover $75k+
Ultimate recovery amount IRRELEVANT to jurisdiction (it could be $5) NOTE: if π recovers LESS that $75k, then she MAY have to pay ∆’s litigation (even tho she won!)
NOTE: Litigation costs do not typically include attorney’s fees. They are more like the filing and discovery fees.
Aggregation = π adds 2 or more claims to meet AIC
If 1 π vs. 1 ∆…claims can be aggregated and
(i) can be unrelated, and
(ii) no limit to # of claims aggregated
CANNOT aggregate unrelated claims for 2+ ∆s, BUT you can for 2+ JOINT-tortfeasors
Value of injunction (discuss both viewpts on exam):
1) Majority view (π’s viewpoint) - does conduct hurt π by more than $75,000?
2) Minority view (∆’s viewpoint) - would it cost ∆ more than $75,000 to comply with the injunction?
WHAT CASES WILL NOT BE HEARD IN FEDERAL COURTS EVEN IF DIVERSITY IS MET?
What types of cases are excluded EVEN IF diversity reqs. are met?
Federal courts will not hear cases involving:
1) issuance of a divorce, alimony or child custody decree
2) probate of a decedent’s estate.
ERIE DOCTRINE
What is the Erie DoctrineAND how does it work?
RULE: “In DIVERSITY CLAIMS (or supp jx claims), federal court must apply state “substantive law”
**FOLLOW these steps IN ORDER for analyzing Erie Case!
Note: Federal Common Law
Erie means that there is no federal common law. So the general common law of contracts, torts, and property is STATE law, and federal courts MUST apply that state’s SUBSTANTIVE law but there are areas where federal courts are free to make up common law on their own
→ Some federal common law areas that allow for FQ SMJ are:
(i) International Relations
(ii) Admiralty
(iii) Disputes btwn States
(iv) Right to Sue a Federal Officer for Violating Ones Federal Rights
————————-
STEP 1:
ASK if these is a federal law ON POINT that DIRECTLY CONFLICTS w/ state law
IF YES → APPLY the FED LAW as long as it is valid
NOTE: FRCP are ALWAYS applied
STEP 2
IF No federal law on point, ASK if the issue is clearly “substantive”
IF YES → APPLY the STATE LAW
The following 4 issues are ALWAYS clearly substantive:
- Elements of a claim/defense
- SOLs
- Rules for tolling SOL
- Conflict (or choice) of law rules
STEP 3: if not one of the 4 valid issues listed per STEP 2, ask:
- OUTCOME DETERMINITIVE TEST
Would applying or ignoring state law be outcome determinative (affect the outcome of the case)?
YES →apply state law - BALANCE OF INTERESTS TEST
Does either the federal or state system have a strong interest in having the rule applied?
Balance of state and federal interests in having their rule applied
- AVOID FORUM SHOPPING
Is there a risk of forum shopping by applying federal law?
If the federal court ignores state law on the issue, will it cause parties to flock to federal court?
YES →apply state law
PLEADING
What is the well-pleaded complaint rule?
Well-pleaded complaint rule = complaint on its face, w/o extraneous material, must ENFORCE a federal RIGHT
π’s claim must “arise under” federal law (e.g. Fed. Cons, legislation)
Exclusive federal jurisdiction in patent, BK cases
Ex – RR gives Gomer a lifetime free pass but then says he can’t use it b/c federal statute prohibits it. Gomer sues, saying federal statute does not apply. NO federal jurisdiction b/c he is not suing to enforce a federal right – he is suing to not enforce the statute.
PERSONAL JURISDICTION
How is pjx assessed in fed cts?
Mostly the dame as w/ NY state ct.
See NY Practice flash cards (also see some variations in this deck)
REMOVAL
What is removal?
∆s (and ONLY ∆s)can remove to federal courtIF the case could have been filed in Fed. Ct. (diversity, alienage, FQ)
Removal is a “one way street”→ ∆ can only remove TO fed ct, never FROM fed ct (if removal was improper, a fed judge will remand back to state ct.)
π can NEVER remove based on ∆’s counterclaim (no exceptions)
All ∆’s who have been served w/process MUST agree to removal
→ if a ∆ is yet to be served w/process, this ∆ obviously isn’t factored into the requirement
A case that was not initially REMOVABLE can become REMOVABLE if an in-state ∆ is DROPPED from the case
LIMITATION ON REMOVAL:
PURE DIVERSITY CASE: ∆ CAN’T remove IF:
(i) any ∆ is a citizen of the forum; OR
(ii) tries to remove more than 1 yr after case was filed in state ct (unless there is some bad faith by π)
REMEMBER: The instate removal limitation when ∆ is a citizen of the forum ONLY applies to diversity jrx. claims.
Waiver of Removal Rights
A ∆ who files a permissive counterclaim in STATE court probably waives the right to remove; BUT
A ∆ who files a compulsory counterclaim in STATE court - probably doesn’t waive right.
REMOVAL
What is the procedure for a properremoval?
1) ∆ must remove within 30 DAYS of service of the first removable pleading on ∆ (typically 30 days from service of process)
If a NEW ∆ is JOINED, the “clock starts anew w/ ∆2” (subject to 1 yr. limitation; unless there is some bad faith by π)
If one of the ∆s is DROPPED, and his removal now allows for there to be diversity jrx, the “clock starts anew w/∆2’s REMOVAL” (subject to 1 yr. limitation; unless there is some bad faith by π)
Note: even if π’s claim is for $75K exactly or less, ∆ can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount actually exceeds $75K
2) Procedure for ∆ to remove is that…
(i) ∆ must File notice of removal in federal court, setting forth grounds of removal (SMJ - either FQ or diversity), signed under Rule 11;
(ii) Then ∆ must attach all documents served on ∆ in the state action;
(iii) Then ∆ must send a copy to all adverse parties;AND
(iv) Then ∆ must then file a copy of the notice of removal in state court
3) Removal is to a federal district court embracing the state ct where filed (BK state ct→EDNY)
→ permission from state ct. where removing from or fed ct. where seeking to remove to is not rqrd
4) If removal was procedurally improper - π must move to remand to state court WITHIN 30 DAYS OF REMOVAL
5) BUT, If removal was improper b/c there is no smjx, π can move to remand at ANY TIME (in fact the court MUST remand on its own if there is no SMJ)
What are the 2 kinds of cases that can be heard in fed ct?
1) Diversity of citizenship= Diverse citizenship (Cit. of State A vs. Cit. of State B) + Amt in controversy ($75k) Includes Alienage jx (Cit. of State A vs. Cit. of Country B)
2) Federal question = claim based on federal law/constitution
What is supplemental jx AND when can it be used in fed cts?
Once a case is in federal ct., an additional CLAIM must have diversity or FQ jrx to be heard alongside the case UNLESS the claim MEETS SUPPLEMENTAL Jrx TEST (see below)
(applies to additional claim, cross claim, counter claim)
Once case is in fed. ct. (DIVERSITY or FED Q)→ Supplemental Jrx allows fed ct. to hear claims over which it has no INDEPENDENT basis of SMJ.
TEST = target claim must share a “common nucleus of operative fact”(i.e. from same “trxn or occurance”) with the underlying case (irrelevant if claim involves different ∆)
In a PURE DIVERSITY case, a π cannot use supplemental jx to overcome a LACK of diversity, BUT…can use to overcome lack of AIC (i.e. can bring in a supplemental claim that is less than $75K
In a FED Q case, a lack of diversity does NOT matter; can use supp jx EVEN on a state law claimas long as the underlying case is a FQ case
If the ∆ brings a claim, it does NOT matter (only binding on the π)
E.G. π (NY) sues ∆ (NY) for (1) violation of fed antitrust laws, and joins a trxnly related claim for (2) violation of a STATE antitrust law→π can bring BOTH claims under supp jx (even the state antitrust case)
NOTE: Ct. has discretion NOT to hear supp jx claim IF: 1. Fed. Q. dismissed early
- State law claim is complex; OR
- State law claim would predominate
SUMMARY OF SUPPLEMENTAL JRX
A NON-FEDERAL and NON-DIVERSITY jurisdiction claim (i.e. a state ct claim) can still BE HEARD in federal ct. IF it meets the supplemental Jrx same T/O test UNLESS ALL of the following factors are in play:
1. The supplemental issue is being asserted by the π (claims by ∆ are not limited); AND
2. The underlying case is in federal court ONLY b/c of DIVERSITY Jrx; AND
3. The supplemental issue that is being asserted by π is against a citizen of the same state as π; OR
4. Other discretionary factors keep the case out of federal court
VENUE
Which federal court must the case be filed in?
RULE: π may lay venue in any district where:
(1) either ALL ∆s reside; OR If ∆’s don’t SHARE a district, BUT are from the SAME state→ can lay venue in the district where ANY of them live
Recall: “Residence” → humans “reside” in their domicile; corporations “reside” in all districts that can get pjx over corp
OR
- π may lay venue where a substantial part of the claim arose
- *Make sure to discuss BOTH ways to lay venue**
Recall: Venue was already set for cases that were removed from state court to federal court (venue was set in the district that embraced the state court)
VENUE
How can venue be transferred?
Can only transfer to a district court that has proper venue and pjx over the ∆ (w/o waiver by D)
→ SO EVEN IF π AND ∆ agree to a new VENUE that venue will NOT be allowed unless it is proper (where ∆(s) reside or where sub. part of claim arose)
Forum Non Conveniens Transfers (FNC)
1) If venue in original forum is proper→ may transfer to another federal district court based on:
(1) convenience of parties or witnesses (“public and private factors showing that it is the center of gravity”); OR
(2) interests in justice
(3) A valid forum selection clause
There is NEVER a right to have a transfer request granted (always at cts discretion)
Ct. applies the choice of law rules of the original court, even if π initiated the transfer.
2) If venue in original forum is improper→ court may transfer in the interests of justice OR dismiss or Stay the case
Note: Dismissal or stay usually happens (versus a transfer) when the proper court is in a different judicial system so transfer is not possible
FNC transfers are almost never granted if π is resident of the present forum
Other court transferred to only needs to be “adequate” which merely means that π will get her day in court
SERVICE of PROCESS
What is service of process?
SERVICE OF PROCESS = SUMMONS + COMPLAINT
Service of Process is when π gives notice to ∆ that she has been sued by delivering to ∆:
(1) a SUMMONS (formal notice of suit and time for response);
+
(2) copy of the COMPLAINT
Service needs to be served w/in 120 DAYS after filing case (when complaint is filed) (OTHERWISE, case is dismissed w/o prejudice unless π shows good cause for the delay)
WHO CAN SERVE?
Any NON-PARTY who’s 18+ serve process
HOW is PROCESS SERVED?
Method = any method allowed by:
(i) FRCP
BASIC CHOICES:
1. PERSONAL SERVICE (delivered to ∆ in person; OR
2.SUBSTITUTE SERVICE (left w/ someone of
suitable age/discretion who resides at usual abode
— where ∆ resides every day of the year); OR
3. AGENT SERVICE (service on ∆’s agent)
OR
(ii) state law (NY);
OR
(iii) the law of the state in which service is effected
ALSO
(iv) FRCP: WAIVER BY MAIL
a) π mails to ∆ a copy of the complaint and 2 copies of a waiver form, w/a prepaid means of returning the form
b) If ∆ executes and mails this waiver back to π in 30 days, ∆ waives formal service of process
c) Then π MUST FILE THE WAIVER IN COURT in order for it to be effective
BAR EXAM Q
NOTE: Even tho ∆ waived formal service, he HASN’T waived pjx defense OR any other defenses!
If ∆ fails (without good faith) to return waiver form, SHE has to pay for service that π has to NOW effect
A fed ct in NY can serve process OUTSIDE NY only if a NY state ct could also (i.e. it has pjx)
How is Long-Arm Jurisdiction Satisfied?
3 Step Analysis
There are three parts to the analysis of Long-Arm jrx in the federal courts.
Part 1 = Contact
Part 2 = Relatedness
Part 3 = Fairness
————————
Part 1 = Contact
There must be a relevant contact between ∆ and the forum state. There are two factors to be addressed in assessing the contact (use these exact words:
1. “The contact must result from ∆’s voluntary act which was ∆’s PURPOSEFUL AVAILMENT”
a. ∆ must “reach out” to the forum where the contact
between ∆ and the forum was not accidental.
- “There must be FORESEEABILITY where it was foreseeable to ∆ that he could get sued in this forum”
Part 2 = Relatedness
π’s claim must arise from ∆’s contact with the forum.
Part 3 = Fairness
“Personal Jurisdiction must be FAIR (or reasonable) under the circumstances.”
The factors that can help to determine fairness are as follows:
a. Burden on ∆ and witnesses: Due process does not guarantee that the most convenient forum for ∆ be selected but if ∆ can show that the forum puts him at a SEVERE disadvantage in the litigation (high burden to meet) then it will be deemed unconstitutional
b. State’s Interest: if π is a citizen of the forum then the state will want to provide a courtroom for its citizens who are allegedly being harmed by out-of-staters.
c. Plaintiff’s Interest: π may be injured and may want to sue at home.
In Rem and Quasi in Rem Jurisdiction
Here the power is over ∆’s property in the forum.
Apply the same personal jrx analysis as you would over ∆ the personan
NOTE: ∆’s property MUST be ATTACHED at the outset of the case
