Tricky shit Flashcards
requirements for compulsory counterclaims to have jurisdiction
- arise from same transaction/occurrance–> court already has supplemental jurisdiction
Do NOT have to meet amt in controversy requirement.
what do permissive counterclaims need
they do NOT arise from same transaction as P’s claim,so they must have separate basis for SMJ- ie. diversity and amt in controversy. MUST NOT DESTROY diversity
if replacement of parties b/c wrong party was named in complaint, does new named party need to meet diversity
YES
elements of false pretenses
1- obtaining title to property
2- through reliance of that person on false info
3- with intent to defraud
in a criminal case, when can D introduce evidence of his good character
anytime as being inconsistent with type of crime being charaged
if adding a party through joinder will destroy diversity, can you still add them
NO
for claim preclusion
both parties must occupy same role in both actions
how can the credibility of witnesses be attacked
R & O testimony or specific instances including crimes of dishonesty or a FELONY
attempt of any crime requires what
Specific INTENT to do that crime, even for statutory crimes
notice of removal must be made when
w/I 30 days of receipt of complaint
when will motion to remand be denied
If the fed ct has SMJ
When can a court hear other claims under Supplemental jurisdiction
if the other claims are part of the same case or controversy
how does impleader work
allows a defendant in diversity in fed ct to IMPLEAD a 3rd party who may be liable to the original D for all or party of P’s claim, can be joined even if NOT diverse or amt is <75k as long as common nucleus of operative fact
For time place manner restriction on speech
interest must be IMPORTANT NOT compelling and narrowly tailored
powers of congress
foreign affairs, coining money, nec and proper, delegating power, commerce clause, spending, tax, war, aliens/non citizens
two types of assault
- attempted battery
- intentionally placing another in fear of imminent bodily harm
Amending pleadings
Can amend once as a matter of right within 21 days but court should freely give leave to amend pleading when justice requires
restitution
Benefit conferred on defendant must be returned to P
When can a court sitting in diversity exercise supplemental jurisdiction
Only if the additional claims come from common nucleus of operative fact and DO NOT DESTROY DIVERSITY
When can a court sitting in fed question exercise supplemental jurisdction
only requirement is that the claims come from common nucleus of operative fact
What is the standard for a new trial
Whether the verdict is against the weight of the evidence
What is the standard for judgment as a matter of law or renewed jmol
whether there is substantial evidence in the record to support the verdict, resolving all disputed issues in the non-moving party’s favor.
For MPT- what to write for intro
one sentence reiterating task memo, - below please find my analysis regarding 1 , 2 , 3
Rule proof
In case name, the court held, (HOLDING) because facts and reasoning.
After Rule Proof…
Just as D in other case did 1, 2 3 so too did D in our case.
conclusion for MPT
Thank you for allowing me to conduct this analysis for you. if there is anything I can do to be of further assistance, please LMK
areas of substantive law
elements of a claim
Statute of limitations
Burden of proof
for conflict of state and fed law- determining which to apply
- is there a valid federal statute or fed rule that covers the disputed issue. If so, the district court must apply fed law rather than state law
–> IF THERE IS NO FED LAW ON POINT< FED ct must apply substantive law of the state in which it sits
if it is a federal rule (not fed statute- is there rule valid- does it change, modify any substantive right? if not, apply the fed rule)
- will failure to apply state law lead to a diff outcome in state v fed court? if no- apply fed law, if yes, apply state law.
statement by party opponent vs statement against interests
Statement by party opponent (non-hearsay)=made by opposing party or their agent… now used against them.
Statement against interests=ONLY APPLIES IF DECLARANT IS UNAVAILABLE!!!
two provisions of dormant commerce clause and a caveat
- IF STATE LAW IS DISCRIMINATORY ON ITS FACE AGAINST OUT OF STATE
if a state law is discriminatory against out of state… then it must show the law is necessary for a COMPELLING state interest and there are NO reasonable alternative means (law usually fails) - If STATE LAW IS NOT DISCRIMNATORY ON ITS FACE- then just check that there is important govt interest and it does not unduly burden interstate commerce.
Caveat, state can discriminate if the state is the market participant-i.e the one buying the goods
standard of review for law
standard of review for factual issues
for law- de novo
for factual issues- clear error
standard of review for discretionary rulings by judge
ABuse of discretion
- i.e admissibility of evidence, testimony s/ be excludied
accomplice liability
aids or encourages principale BEFORE or DURING CRIME WITH INTENT that the principal commit the crime
article 4 privileges and immunities clause
can protect in state resources like RECREATIONAL ISSUES- charging out of state people more for recreational license BUT NOT for commercial things.
for specific intent crimes, mistakes of fact can be what?
Reasonable OR UNREASONABLE.
Can be unreasonable mistake as long as it is HONEST
Attempted x crime = what type of crime
specific intent- so reasonable Or HONEST but unreasonable mistake of fact is a defense