Trial and Post-trial Flashcards
Dismissal
Voluntary dismissal: P may obtain one voluntary dismissal without prejudice.
Involuntary dismissal: the court may do this at D’s request, or at the court’s own discretion. Involuntary dismissal is often with prejudice.
Dismissal for failure to state a claim
occurs when even if the court assumes all allegations are true, P still cannot win based on the face of the complaint.
CA: this is called general demurrer.
CA mandatory dismissal
If case is not brought to trial within 5 years of filing the complaint, or 2 years have passed from filing until the service of process.
Default judgment
D fails to respond within 21 days after service in federal court, or 30 days after service in CA courts.
Motion for summary judgment
MSJ will be granted if the moving party can establish that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Standard of review:
- The court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party,
- Evidence must be comprised of firsthand knowledge and credibility is not weighed here.
- A court can grant a partial summary judgment as to one of the several causes of action.
Jury trial
Federal court:
- a jury decides the factual legal issues; then the judge determines the equitable claim.
- demand of jury must be made in writing no later than 14 days after service.
- each side has unlimited challege on voir dire for cause, and three preemptory challenges.
- a jury contain 6-12 jurors and a unanimous vote is required.
CA:
- the judge decides the equitable issues first. then the jury decides the legal issues.
- each party is entitled to unlimited challenges for cause, and six preemptory challenges.
- a jury contains 12 jurors and alternates; only a three quarters juror vote is required.
Judgment as a matter of law (JMOL)
JMOL occurs when one party files a motion after the other side has been heard at trial (D can usually move twice, P once), contending that reasonable person could not possibly disagree on the result.
In CA state court, JMOL is called a motion for a directed verdict.
Renewed Judgment as a matter of law (RJMOL)
RJMOL occurs after the jury has reached a verdict, contending that reasonable person could not disagree on the result. The losing party must have originally filed a JMOL or they cannot later file a RJMOL since it is a renewal of the earlier motion.
- Federal: motion must be made within 28 days after entry of judgment.
- CA: motion must be made within 15 days after mailing or service of notice of entry of judgment, or 180 days after the entry of the judgment.
Motion for a new trial
Losing party requests a new trial based on errors made at trial. Same filing deadline as RJMOL.
Grounds for a new trial includes:
- prejudicial error at trial that makes the judgment unfair;
- new evidence that could not have been obtained for the original trial through due diligence;
- prejudicial misconduct of a party/attorney/3d party/juror.
- judgment is against the weight of the evidence
- **excessive damages or inadequate damages
Motion to set aside judgment
May be brought within one year of the judgment
Grounds for the motion:
- clerical errors
- neglectful mistakes;
- newly discovered evidence;
- fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of a party;
- judgment is void for lack of due process
Remittitur
occurs when a judge orders that a new trial for D will take place unless P agrees to a reduced award of damages because the judge finds the damages awarded by the jury so excessive as to shock the conscience.
Additur
occurs when a judge orders that P will get a new trial unless D agrees to an increased award of damages because the judge finds the damages awarded were insufficient.
- Federal: does not permit additur.
- CA: additur is permitted.
Final Judgment Rule
Only final judgments may be appealed. A final judgment is an ultimate decision made by the trial court on the merits of an entire case such that there is a final judgment as to all parties and all causes of action.
Exceptions to the final judgment rule
- injunctions and some interlocutory orders;
- trial court certifies an interlocutory order for appeal;
- collateral orders, such as those regarding procedural issues;
- multiple claims or parties involved and some issues are pending, but the issue is resolved as to one claim or party and the judge expressly determines that the order as to that party is final. (CA: express determination is not required)
- extraordinary writ: if an order is not otherwise appealable and the circumstances are exceptional, the aggrieved party may seek a writ of mandate to compel the lower court to act.
- class certification
Time limits for appeal
Federal: within 30 days after entry of final judgment.
CA: within 0 days after service of notice of entry of judgment; or 180 days after entry of the judgment if no notice is served.
Standards of review on appeal
- de novo: clean slate. Questions of law are reviewed de novo.
- clear error: questions of fact determined by the trial judge are reviewed using a clear error standard.
- In the light most favorable to affirming the verdict: questions of facts determined by a jury is required in a light most favorable affirming the jury’s verdict. The appellate court asks if a reasonable jury could have reached the same conclusion.
- mixed questions of fact and law are reviewed de novo
- abuse of discretion: matters that are discretionary to the judge are reviewed using an abuse of discretion standard. It will only be overturned if it is clearly wrong.
Res judicata (claim preclusion)
Res judicata precludes relitigation of a claim that has already been decided in prior litigation between the same parties.
Requirements for res judicata to apply
- there is valid final judgment on the merits. (Fed: a judgment is final when it is rendered; CA: a judgment is final when the appeals have concluded)
- The same P and D were parties (or privies, successor in interest to the property or claim) in the prior case and the subsequent case.
- The same claim (cause of action) is asserted in the prior case and the subsequent case.
What are considered as “same claim” in res judicata?
Federal: arise from the same transaction or occurrence of the same claim.
CA: applies the primary rights theory, which allows a separate cause of action for the invasion of each primary right.
Collateral estoppel (issue preclusion)
Collateral estoppel precludes relitigation of a particular issue that has already been decided in prior litigation. A subsequent suit based on the same issue will be barred where the first claim meets the following requirements:
- there is valid final judgment on the merits.
- the same issue was actually litigated.
- the issue was necessarily determined (essential to the judgment) in the first case. (no dicta)
- collateral estoppel can be used only against someone who was a party (or in privity with a party) in the prior suit iin the interest of fairness. (so they have an opportunity to defend the action);
- The party asserting collateral estoppel has to be a party in the prior case. (mutuality rule)
Note: CA and other states where the mutuality rule does not apply: “stranger” to the prior case can rely on a prior judgment if doing so is “fair.”
- Defensive use of prior litigation to avoid liability in a subsequent suit will be allowed where the party against whom collateral estoppel is asserted had a fair opportunity to be heard on the critical issue in the prior case.
- Offensive use of prior litigation to establish an issue in a subsequent suit is disfavored and will be allowed only when it is fair and equitable employing a balancing test.
