Venue

Question 1

28 USC 1391 b - a civil action may be brought it

Answer 1

1. a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all d are residents of the state in which the district is located
2. a judicial district In which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated or
3. if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any d is subject to the courts of personal jurisdiction with respect to such action

Question 2

28 USC 1391 c - residency for all venue purposes

Answer 2

1. a natural person, including an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the US shall be deemed to reside in the judicial district in which that person is domiciled
2. an entry with the capacity to sue and be sued in it’s common name under applicable law, whether or not inc shall be deemed to reside is a d in any judicial district in which such d is subject to the crts pj with respect to the civil action in question and
3. a d non resident of the US may be sued in ANY judicial district and the joinder of such a d shall be disregarded in determining where the action may be brought with respect to the other d.

Question 3

28 UCS 1391 d - residency of corps in states with multiple districts

Answer 3

for the purpose of venue under this chapter a state which has more than one jdx and in which a d is a corp subject to pj at time and action is commenced, such corp shall be deemed to reside in that state within which its contacts would be sufficient for pj and if no district exists where it has the most significant contacts

Question 4

multiple venues

Answer 4

when multiple venues are proper p is free to select among any of the options constrained only by the need too elect a district court that could exercise pj over all the d.

Question 5

28 USC 1441 a - venue and removal - a reprise

Answer 5

a. except as otherwise expressly provided by act of conger any civil action brought is a state court of which the district courts of the US have original jdx may be removed by the d or the d to the district court of the us for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending

Question 6

the fallback provision

Answer 6

permits venur in any district having pj over any of d only if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought

Question 7

b1

Answer 7

venue is proper in a judicial district in which any d resides if all d are residents of the state in which the d is located in states with multiple must id both the ds state of residence and the district in which the d resides

Question 8

b2

Answer 8

venue is proper in a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated (giving rise to a claim)

Question 9

individuals

Answer 9

residency based on persons domicile

Question 10

unincorporated entities

Answer 10

determined by looking to the residence of the association itself rather than that of its individual members

Question 11

corps

Answer 11

residents of any district where they are subject to personal jurisdiction

Question 12

venue in removed cases

Answer 12

the district court of the US for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending

Question 13

venue for non res

Answer 13

d may be sued in any jdx

Question 14

28 USC 1404 a - change of venue

Answer 14

for the convenience of parties and witnesses in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought or to any district or division to which all parties have consented *only when venue was proper in the original district

Question 15

the Gilbert factors

Answer 15

private interest factors
- relative ease of access to sources of proof
- availability of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling witnesses
- cost of obtaining attendance of willing witnesses
- possibility of view of premises if appropriate
- all Stehr practical problems that make trial of a case easy expeditious and inexpensive
Public interest factors
- local interest in having localized controversies decided at home
-interest in having the trial of a diversity case in a forum that is at home with the law must govern the action
- the avoidance of unnecessary problems in conflict of laws or in the application of foreign law
- the unfairness of burdening citizens in an unrelated forum with jury duty

Question 16

Piper aircraft

Answer 16

• there is ordinarily a strong presumption in favor of the ps choice of forum which may be overcome only when the private and public interest factors clearly point towards trial in the alternative forum
• that presumption applies with less force when the p or real parties in interest are foreign because the central purpose of any forum non convenient inquiry is to ensure that the trial is convenient a foreign p choice deserves less deference
  (piper - small plane crashed in Scotland wanted to bring case in the us cuz its easier - possibility of change in substantive law should not be given conclusive or even substantial weight in a forum non conveniens inquiry

Question 17

28 USC 1406 a - curing defective venue

Answer 17

the district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss or if it be in the interest of justice transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought

Question 18

extra considerations

Answer 18

a crt may dismiss a case for improper venue under 28 USC 1406 instead of transferring but only if under right circa of 12 b3
Potential factors
- ps choice of forum
- state most familiar with governing law
- location where agreements were negotiatied and executed
- parties contacts with forum
-contacts relating to ps cause of action in chosen forums
-cost of litigation in competing forums
-location of witnesses
-availability of compulsory process to compel attendance of unwilling non party witnesses
-ease of access to sources of proof
-existence of a valid forum selection clause in a contract between the parties

Question 19

Forum non conveniens

Answer 19

if you want to dismiss and transfer to different state court
- when an alternative forum has jurisdiction to hear the case and when trial in the chosen forum would establish oppressiveness and vexation to a d out of all proportion to ps convenience or when the chosen forum is inappropriate because of considerations affecting the cats own administrative and legal problems the court may in the existence of its sound discretion dismiss the case (piper aircraft)

Question 20

Rules of Decision Act (28 USC 1652)

Answer 20

the laws of several states, except where the constitution or treatises of the US or acts of congress otherwise require or provide, shall be regarded as rules of decision in civil actions in the courts of the US in cases where they apply

Question 21

Erie

Answer 21

federal courts are to apply state substantive law and federal procedural law
twin aims
- discouragement of forum shopping and
-avoidance of inequitable administration of law

Question 22

Guaranty Trust co v. York - Outcome determinative test

Answer 22

plainly enough a statue that would completely bar recovery in a suit if brought in a state court bears on a state created that so intimately affect recovery or non recovery a federal court in a diversity case should follow state law (cannot be read without reference to the twin aims)

Question 23

Shady Grove: Justice Stevens concurrence

Answer 23

the analysis on whether the state law actually is part of a states framework of substantive rights or remedies … a state procedural rule though undeniable in the ordinary sense of the term may exist to influence substantive outcomes and may in some instances become so bound up with the state created right or remedy that it defines the scope of that submissive right or remedy… a federal rule effectively abridges enlarges or modifies a state created right or remedy

Question 24

Is there a codified federal rule that directly conflicts with a competing state law - yes

Answer 24

Hanna analysis
1. is the rule a valid exercise of constitutional powers? Does the rule regulate procedure the judicial process for enforcing rights and duties recognized by substantive law? yes?
2. is the rule valid under the REA? a valid rule does not abridge enlarge or modify any substantive right? Yes? - the federal rule applies - no? go the the Erie analysis