#10933 - Jones Civ Pro Outline Copy - Civil Procedure

Objectives of a procedural system

1. Truth

2. Resolution of disputes

   1. Efficiency

   2. Economy

   3. Fairness

Jurisdictional concepts

1. Limited jurisdiction: family courts, bankruptcy courts

2. Original jurisdiction

3. Appellate jurisdiction

4. Concurrent jurisdiction: more than one court have jurisdiction, in this case P can choose a court to bring suit (Federal/ State courts)

   1. Removal: Any civil action brought in a state court of which the disctrict courts of the U.S. have original jurisdiction may be removed by the D to the district court of the U.S. for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending.

5. Exclusive jurisdiction: Congress sometimes passes statutes requiring certain kinds of claim to be brought only in federal court.

Subject Matter Jurisdiction: type of dispute (diversity or federal law).

1. For purposes of determining whether diversity jurisdiction exists, a person is a “citizen” of the state in which he or she is “domiciled.” For adults, domicile is established by physical presence in a place in connection with a certain state of mind concerning one’s intent to remain there.

2. Advantages of filing in federal court: speed, picking or avoiding trier of fact

Personal jurisdiction

1. fairness to parties (focus on defendant’s contacts)

Venue: Location of trial (convenience to parties)

1. Only after subject matter and personal jurisdiction are established.

Rule 8 requires that a complaint merely consist of a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.

Pre-answer motions Rule 12

Answers to a complaint:

1. Deny

2. Admit+ affirmative defense

3. Counterclaim

4. Crossclaim: D1 sues D2

5. Third party claim: D sues third party, e.g. insurance company

Joinder

1. Add additional parties

2. Joinder of claims

Amendment Rule 15

1. The court should freely give leave to amend when justice so requires

Rule 20(a)(2)(A) provides that all persons may be joined in one action as defendants if there is asserted against them “any right to relief… arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences.”

Two limits

1. Relevance: interpreted broadly

2. Privilege: cannot get information

Timing is post-discovery

Court considers all evidence in light most favorable to non-moving party.

JNOV: Only when the evidence so strongly and so favorably points in the favor of the moving party that reasonable people could not arrive at a contrary verdict.

Claim preclusion (res judicata)

1. Same claim (multiple types of damages)

2. Between same parties

3. Judged on its merits

4. Judgment must be final

Issue preclusion (collateral estoppel)

1. Once a court has decided an issue of fact or law necessary to its judgment, that decision precludes relitigation of the issue in a suit on a different cause of action involving a party to the first case.

Merger: claims in the second lawsuit cannot be brought because it’s merged in the judgment in the first lawsuit

Rationales

1. Efficiency

2. Economy

3. Repose: parties should be able to rely on the judgment and make future plans

4. Fairness: parties already have the opportunity to fully adjudicate the issue

The Lawyer’s Responsibility

1. Rule 11(b)(1): not to bring a lawsuit for improper purpose

2. Rule 11(b)(2): claims are warranted by existing law or nonfrivolous argument for extension of the law

3. Rule 11(b)(3): must investigate the facts

4. Rule 11(c): sanctions may be imposed on parties violating. Sanctions can be imposed on lawyer, law firm, or the parties.

5. Rule 11(c)(1): Sanctions initiated by party with motion served but not filed with court for 21 days – safe harbor provision. Court can initiate sanctions without safe harbor (as necessary to deter egregious behavior)

6. Monetary sanctions can include: expert fees, transfer fees, witness fees, etc.

Article III section 2 provides that federal courts may hear cases arising under federal law.

28 USC 1331: The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.

1. Well-pleaded complaint rule (Mottley): For a case to arise under federal law, federal question should arise in the plaintiff's well-pleaded complaint. The federal issue should be the a necessary, substantial element in the original complaint, not merely marginal. (Substantial rule). It should also be in the original complaint rather than in an anticipated defense or a counterclaim.

   1. Rationale of Mottley:

      1. it serves as a sorting function, and permits the sorting to occur at the start of the lawsuit before the parties and court have invested much time.

      2. It promotes efficiency;

      3. jurisdictional issues should not rely on contingency;

      4. it promotes federalism and division of authority.

2. Smith exception: even if federal law does not create the right to sue, the claim satisfies arising under jurisdiction if the P, in order to establish a state law claim, must prove a proposition of federal law (that is, the federal issue is embedded in a state claim).

3. However, the need to resolve a federal question to decide a state law claim will not always support arising-under jurisdiction. The embedded federal issue must be substantial to support jurisdiction. Grable three part test: the state law claim (1) necessarily raises a federal issue; (2) actually disputed and substantial; (3) which a federal forum may entertain without disturbing any congressionally approved balance of federal and state judicial responsibilities.

Bound by determination: Parties who appear, challenge the subject matter jurisdiction of a federal court, and lose are bound by that determination; they may not thereafter challenge the judgment in a second action.

Settlement: Parties can ask the court to include the settlement in a consent decree in order to preserve federal jurisdiction should a breach of settlement occurs.

Declaratory relief: whether or not a declaratory relief arises under federal law depends on the underlying claim. If the underlying claim arises under federal law, then the declaratory relief is under federal law. The declaratory relief statute cannot, in and of itself, provide a basis for federal question jurisdiction.

Rationale for not considering counterclaims:

1. For permissive counterclaims, D can always bring the permissive counterclaim in another lawsuit

2. For compulsory counterclaims, D should have brought the lawsuit first

28 USC 1332: (a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between--

1. (1) citizens of different States;

2. (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State;

3. (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties (must have citizens of different U.S. states on different sides of the v.) ; and

4. (4) a foreign state, defined in section 1603(a) of this title, as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

State citizenship in diversity cases:

1. The citizenship of a person is determined by the domicile, the place he resided in with the intent to remain indefinitely.

2. A corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen of every State and foreign state by which it has been incorporated and of the State or foreign state where it has its principal place of business. ( and = citizens of both states)

   1. principal place of business means the state in which the company’s high level officers control and coordinate its activities, which will usually be its corporate headquarters. (Hertz).

The complete diversity rule:

1. Diversity jurisdiction is only proper if all plaintiffs are citizens of different states from all defendants. No Plaintiff can be from the same state as any defendant.

2. Complete diversity can be achieved by taking out a party (Caterpillar), but cannot be achieved by changing the internal composition of a party (Grupo).

The amount-in-controversy requirement

1. The court will find the amount requirement met as long as it is possible that P’s claim would support a recover of more than 75k. If, however, there is no way that the amount of controversy exceeds 75k, the judge would find that the amount of controversy requirement is not met.

2. Courts will also allow monetary measurements for intangible reliefs such as injunctions.

Aggregation

1. A P can add up the amounts for all the claims against a single D, whether or not the claims are related.

2. A P cannot aggregate claims aggregate claims against different defendants.

3. Two plaintiffs generally cannot add their claims against one D, unless (1) one of the plaintiffs meets the amount of controversy and the other plaintiff sues for the same transaction, or (2) unless the two plaintiffs have an undivided interest.

4. Compulsory counterclaims arising out of the same transaction can be brought even if the counterclaim amount is smaller than 75k. Permissive counterclaims cannot be brought if the amount is...