CIVILPROCEDURE I.

INCENTIVESTOLITIGATE

I.

IncentivestoLitigate
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

II. WhyLitigate?DAMAGES

CivilCasesmakeupabouthalfofcourtfilings 98%ofcivilfilingsareinStateCourt Riseisduetoeconomictimes 50%ofDswin,Sumis$37,000 Contractsaremostfiledcivilaction 6. Mostcivillitigationisresolvedbysettlement. 7. Mostcasesrecoverlessthan$50,000

A.Substitutionary 1. CompensatorysubstitutingtomakethePwholeusuallywillbe$$$
i. Economic:DamagesthatcompensatethePformoneyhehaslost

ii.

2. LiquidatedDamages:PartiesagreeBeftorehandaboutthepriceoftheharm[ contractual] 3. StatutoryDamages:statutessetminimumdamagesnotspecificallytiedtotheamount ofthelosssuffered 4. PunitiveDamages:MeanttopunishtheDforwrongfulbehavior;AlsoMeanttodeter

similarbehaviorinthefuture i. Sizeofpunitiveinrelationtoharmtoasmeasuredbycompensatorydamagesratio of9:1presumptivemaximum ii. Sizeofpunitiveinrelationtocivilpenalties

NonEconomic:Damagesforthingslikepainandsuffering,lossofenjoyment, impairment,disfigurement,inconvenience,grief,anxiety,humiliation,oremotional distress

StateFarmMutualAutomobileInsuranceCo.v.Campbell
DamageAward:Finalawardof$1millionincompensatorydamagesand$145millionin punitivedamages. Rationale:"fewawardsexceedingasingledigitratiobetweenpunitiveandcompensatory damages,toasignificantdegree,willsatisfydueprocess."9:1ratio DoctrineReliedUpon: BMWofNorthAmericav.Gore[suggestedathreeparttestindeterminingwhethera punitivedamageawardviolateddueprocess] DegreeofReprehensibilityofD'sconduct RatioofharmtoPtocompensatorydamagesawarded Comparisontocivilinfractions(fines)forsimilarmisconducts

B.SpecificDamagesRemediesthatseektorestoredirectlyandspecificallythatwhichtheD
hastakenfromtheP.

1. Legal 2. Equitable


Legal Damages Ejectment Replevin Mandamus HabeasCorpus Thesecanbeheardbyajury

CIVILPROCEDURE I.INCENTIVESTOLITIGATE
Equitable CourtsofChancery Injunctionspecificandequitable Mostcommonformofequitablerelief Rescission Reformation QuietTitle ConstructiveTrust Thesecanonlybeheardbyajudge Ejectment Injunctions Rescission/Reformation Mandamus HabeasCorpus Specific Replevin

a. PermanentInjunctiveReliefappropriateremedywherethePisbeing
threatenedbysomeinjuryforwhichhehasnoadequatelegalremedy Injunctionisabalancingtest Balancinginterestofpartieshardshipon,hardshipto

SigmaChemicalCo.v.Harrisnoncompete
RuleofLaw:Permanentinjunctivereliefisanappropriateremedywheretheisbeing threatenedbysomeinjuryforwhichhehasnoadequatelegalremedy Issue:Determiningwhenpermanentinjunctivereliefisajustifiableremedy LanguageUsed: Thedeterminationwhethertoissueaninjunctioninvolves: abalancingoftheinterestsofthepartieswhomightbeaffectedbytheCourt's decision thehardshiponifreliefisdeniedasopposedtothehardshiptoifitisgranted .... Moreover,themainprerequisitetoobtaininginjunctivereliefisafindingthatis beingthreatenedbysomeinjuryforwhichhehasnoadequatelegalremedy." Policy: Reasonablenessofthecovenant Reasonablenessintemporalscope Geographicscopeisreasonable

C.DeclaratoryReliefNeitherdamagesnoraspecificremedycansolvetheproblem,partiesin
suchcircumstancesmayseekadeclarationoftheirrights

FinancingLitigation

A. Whatarethecostsoflitigation? Courts,Judges,Staff$6500/dayPaidbyTaxes Attorney'sFeesaccountformostofthecostofLitigationintheU.S.

ExpertsandInvestigators FilingFees,processservers,courtreporters,photocopies,technology,travel

CIVILPROCEDURE I.INCENTIVESTOLITIGATE

HowdoAmericansPay?
A. HourlyRateMostcommonfinancingmechanism B. FlatRateusedforworkthatlawyerthinkswillhavepredictableinvestmentoftime 1. Willsmostcommon C. Feeforservice(withvariations):prevalentincommerciallitigation D. Feespreading:

1. Insurance&contingentfees:prevalentinPersonalInjuryandTort E. ContingencyFeelawyeragreestoprovidelegalrepresentationwiththefeetobepaidfromthe proceedsofanysettlementorrecovery o Causessuccessfulclientstobearpartofthecostsattributabletounsuccessfulclients(feesfrom successfulcoverunsuccessful) o Useaslidingscalehowfaryougointhecase o NORECOVERY=NOFEE AmericanSystem Eachpartyfinanceshisowncase Leftout: damageclaimstoosmall; nonmonetaryreliefinnonfeeshiftcases; s Britishsystem Loserpaysbothitsownfeesandthoseoftheother side Encouragessmallclaims,aslongastheyhaveagood chanceofwinning

DefenseInsuranceAttorneys
1. Feeshiftingstatutes:prevalentincivilrightsand"public"litigation
a. Contractualcontractsrequirethebreachingpartytopaytheatty'sfeesoftheotherparty i. Somerequirelosertopaythewinner,whichmaydeterwrongfulbreach ii. Symmetricalloserpayswinner iii. AsymmetricalIfLwins,ThastopayTandL'slawyerfees,ifLlosesthanTonlyhas topayT'sfees. 2. Statutorylegislatureprovidesforpaymentofwinnersattyfees,prevalentincivilrightstatutesand othergovtsuits a. FeeShiftingisinATR b. Haveattysandclientsseekfeesandthefeebelongstotheatty c. Usuallyanonprofitorg 3. ClassActionFeeSpreading a. FeeSpreadingdoesn'tshiftfromPtoD i. Justspreadsthemamongpeoplewhobenefitthejudgment

Financial Arrangement Who'sintheriskpool? Howdoesthecostgetspread?


Liability Insurance

CIVILPROCEDURE I.INCENTIVESTOLITIGATE
Otherpolicyholders,someofwhomwillhave Noaccidentdrivers'premiumsubsidize accidents(orotherliabilitycreatingevents) thosewhohaveaccidents Theinsuredmaynotcoverallcostsof Otherinsuredpeoplewhopay lit monthlydues Generatedbyotherclientswhohave recoveredorsettled

ContingentFees Lawyersandlawyer'sotherclients

Evansv.JeffD.clientshadtherighttowaiverecoveryoflegalfeesw/otheconsentofattys
Issue:Docourts/clientshavethepowertoapprovethewaiverofattorney'sfeesw/oattysconsent? Rationale:Thiscourtheldthatstatutesprovidingrecoveryofattorney'sfeesdidnotconferanyrights onattorneys.Thus,clientshadtherighttowaiverecoveryoflegalfeeswithouttheconsentof attorneys.So,sometimesthereisaconflictofinterestbetweenlawyersandtheirclientswhenthe wishestomakeasettlementthatseekwaiveroffees. Note:Theattorneyandtheclientcanavoidthisbyacarefullydraftedengagementagreementinwhich theclientagreestopayfeesoutofanysettlementreceived.However,thisisnothelpfulifclientis seekinginjunctiverelief.

BuckhannonBoardandCareHome,Inc.v.Va.DeptofHealthandHuman ResourceIfyoudontgetajudgmentcanyoustillgetattysfees?
Facts:Buckhannonbaseditsclaimonthe"catalysttheory,"whichpositsthataPisa"prevailing party"ifitachievesthedesiredresultbecausethelawsuitbroughtaboutavoluntarychangeintheD's conduct. Holding:Courtheldthatthe"catalysttheory"isnotapermissiblebasisfortheawardofattorney'sfees Rationale:"AD'svoluntarychangeinconduct,althoughperhapsaccomplishingwhatthesoughtto achievebythelawsuit,lacksthenecessaryjudicialimprimaturonthechange.Ourprecedentsthus counselagainstholdingthattheterm'prevailingparty'authorizesanawardofattorney'sfeeswithouta correspondingalterationinthelegalrelationshipoftheparties." Dissent:JusticeGinsburgarguedthat"Congressprescribedfeeshiftingprovisionstoencourageprivate enforcementoflawsdesignedtoadvancecivilrights

I.

CIVILPROCEDURE III.FINANCINGLITIGATION ProvisionalRemedies:ReliefpendingadjudicationoftheDispute

1. Mustbegrantedordeniedbyajudge,notjury 2. Allrelevantinfoisn'tavailableyet, 3. SomecanargueisaviolationofDueProcess

II.

Two"tests"forpreliminaryinjunctions:
StandardTest AlternativeTest IrreparableharmtoP Eitherpwillhavefairchanceofsuccessonmerits,solongas damagethatPmaysufferissufficientlyserious OR

IrreparableharmtoP Pwillprobablywinonmerits

BalancingtheEquities:thethreatenedinjurytothe BalanceofHardship:PharmedbyrefusalmuchmorethanD outweighsanypotentialharmtothe;and hurtbygrant Injunctioninpublicinterest Injunctioninpublicinterest

III.

DueProcess
A. ProceduralDueProcessFuentes Solution:addsomeprocess:notice,hearing,bond,etc B. SubstantiveDueProcessCampbell:unfairtodothis Additionalprocesswonthelp,aboutthecontent Aprovisionalformofinjunctiverelief.Provisional monetaryreliefattachmentandgarnishment. Courtmayadvancethetrialonthemeritsand consolidateitwiththehearing.Butmustpreserve righttojurytrial. Prelim.Inj. Maybeissuedbythecourtw/onotice,ifhe hadtouseregularPreliminjunctionprocess (StandardTest) onlyiffactsshowimmediateandirreparable injurywillresultbeforetheadversepartycan beheard,attycertifiesinwritingeffortsto givenotice. Entitledonlyif:1.Pwillsufferirreparableinjuryif notgranted2Pwillhaveafairchanceofsuccess onthemerits3DwillnotbeharmedmorethanP ishelpedbyinjunction4grantingisinthepublic interest;Dcanappealimmediately Expiresafter14days, Rule65(b)(4)after2days,theadversepartymay appearandmovetodissolveormodifytheorder. Note:ExParteTempRestrainingOrdereven shorter 28U.S.C.2361,whichrelatesto preliminaryinjunctionsinactionsof interpleaderorinthenatureof interpleader;

Preliminary Injunction

Temporary Restraining Order(TRO)

CIVILPROCEDURE III.FINANCINGLITIGATION Inglis&Sonsv.ITTBakingwantedaninjunctioncourtdidntthinkhewouldwin

Holding:"Itisnotnecessary,inorderforpreliminaryinjunctiontoissue,thatmovingpartybereasonably certaintosucceedonmerits;ifharmthatmayoccurtoPissufficientlyserious,itisonlynecessarythatthere beafairchanceofsuccessonmerits."(AlternativeTest) Rationale:ThetrialcourtdeniedapreliminaryinjunctionbecauseitfoundthatitwasuncertainthattheP wouldwinattrial.However,thereisanalternativetestwhichallowsapreliminaryinjunctionevenwhenthe chancethatthePwillwinisuncertain.Underthattest,thereneedonlybea"fairchanceofsuccess"onthe meritssolongasthedamagethatthePmaysufferis"sufficientlyserious" Winterv.NationalResourcesDefenseCounselAlternativetestistoolenient. Hadtouse"standard"test. IrreparableharmtoP Pwillprobablywinonmerits Dnotharmedmorethanphelped Injunctioninpublicinterest

Fuentesv.Shevinanytemporary,nonfinaldeprivationofpropertyisnonethelessadeprivationinthe
termsofthe14thAmendmentwithoutanopportunitytoapretrialhearing Facts:Creditorrepossessedstoveoncredittorepow/opriornoticetodebtor.Dinstitutedanactionfor repossessionofboththestoveandthestereoandobtainedawritofreplevinorderingasherifftorepossess thepropertybeforeprovidingPwithnotice. PArg:PrejudgmentreplevinprocedureswereunconstitutionalinlightoftheDueProcess Clauseofthe14thAmendment.Psoughtinjunctivereliefandadeclaratoryjudgmentagainstenforcement oftheprejudgmentreplevin. Issue:Doesdueprocessunderthe14thAmendmentrequirethatpartiesfacingareplevinactionbenotified inatimelymannerandgivenanopportunitytobeheardpriortoaprejudgmentseizure? Holding&Rationale:Yes.Thecourtheldthatpartieshavetherighttopriornoticeandahearingto preventarbitrarydeprivationofproperty.Anysignificantpropertyinterestanytemporary,nonfinal deprivationofpropertyisnonethelessadeprivationinthetermsofthe14thAmendment. Test:Thestatecanonlytakestuffwithoutahearingwhen: 1. Theseizureisdirectlynecessarytoprotectanimportantpublicinterest. 2. Thereisaspecialneedforpromptaction. 3. Thestatekeepsstrictcontroloftheseizureprocessbyhavingagovernmentofficialmakesurethe seizureisnecessaryandjustified.

CIVILPROCEDURE V.PLEADINGS

I.

Pleadings
c. DemandforjudgmentforthereliefsoughtDamages GoalsofthePleading Setstagefordiscovery o Nottoomuchdetail Weedoutweakordisfavoredclaims o Morespecificity Reflectburdensofproduction&Persuasion Evenmoredetail Under1938FRCPchange: 1. Theymergedlawandequity 2. Theyestablishedbroadandflexiblejoinderofclaimsandparties 3. Theycreatedpowerfulproceduresforpretrialdiscovery 4. Theysoughtawayofdefiningpleadingthatdeemphasizedroleinlitigationand avoidedboththerequiredformulasofwritsandfactsofthecode Rule7(a)(17)OnlythesePleadingsareallowed:

a. Allegationofwrongdoing b. Shortandplainstatementoftheclaimshowingthepleaderisentitledtorelief

acomplaint; ananswertoacomplaint; ananswertoacounterclaim designatedasacounterclaim; ananswertoacrossclaim;

athirdpartycomplaint; ananswertoathirdpartycomplaint; and ifthecourtordersone,areplytoan answer.

Rule7(b)Motions Arequestforacourtordermustbemadebymotion: (A)beinwritingunlessmadeduringahearingortrial; (B)statewithparticularitythegroundsforseekingtheorder;and (C)statethereliefsought. Rule8claim,jurisdiction,demandforjudgment ClaimsforRelief o 8(a)(1)Statementofjurisdiction o 8(a)(2)shortandplainstatementoftheclaimshowingthatpleaderisentitledtorelief Donotrequireaclaimanttosetoutindetailthefactsuponwhichhebaseshisclaim, claimwillgivetheDfairnoticeofwhattheP'sclaimisandthegroundsuponwhichit rests o 8(a)(3)demandforjudgmentforthereliefsought(damages) Defenses;AdmissionsandDenials.
8(b)(1)Inrespondingtoapleading,apartymust: (A)stateinshortandplaintermsitsdefensestoeachclaimassertedagainstit;and (B)admitordenytheallegationsassertedagainstitbyanopposingparty. 8(b)(2)DenialsRespondingtotheSubstance.

CIVILPROCEDURE V.PLEADINGS
Adenialmustfairlyrespondtothesubstanceoftheallegation. 8(b)(3)GeneralandSpecificDenials. Apartythatintendsingoodfaithtodenyalltheallegationsofapleadingincludingthe jurisdictionalgroundsmaydosobyageneraldenial.Apartythatdoesnotintendtodenyallthe allegationsmusteitherspecificallydenydesignatedallegationsorgenerallydenyallexceptthose specificallyadmitted. 8(b)(4)DenyingPartofanAllegation. Apartythatintendsingoodfaithtodenyonlypartofanallegationmustadmitthepartthatistrue anddenytherest. 8(b)(5)LackingKnowledgeorInformation. Apartythatlacksknowledgeorinformationsufficienttoformabeliefaboutthetruthofan allegationmustsostate,andthestatementhastheeffectofadenial. 8(b)(6)EffectofFailingtoDeny. Anallegationotherthanonerelatingtotheamountofdamagesisadmittedifaresponsive pleadingisrequiredandtheallegationisnotdenied.Ifaresponsivepleadingisnotrequired,an allegationisconsidereddeniedoravoided.

8(c)AffirmativeDefense (1)InGeneral. Inrespondingtoapleading,apartymustaffirmativelystateany avoidanceoraffirmativedefense,including: accordandsatisfaction; injurybyfellowservant; arbitrationandaward; laches; assumptionofrisk; license; contributorynegligence; payment; dischargeinbankruptcy; release; duress; resjudicata; estoppel; statuteoffrauds; failureofconsideration; statuteoflimitations;and fraud; waiver. illegality; (2)MistakenDesignation. Ifapartymistakenlydesignatesadefenseasacounterclaim,oracounterclaimasa defense,thecourtmust,ifjusticerequires,treatthepleadingasthoughitwerecorrectly designated,andmayimposetermsfordoingso. CONSISTENCYINPLEADING LAWYERWILLSETFORTHWHATARETHEPOSSIBLEVERSIONOFLAWANDFACTS THATAPPEARPLAUSIBLEATTHETIMETHEPLEADINGISFILED Allegationsaretemperedbyburdensofproof Thelawyerwillhavetosettleonasingleversinobeforethecasegoestotrial 8(d)PleadingtoBeConciseandDirect;Alternativestatements;Inconsistency. 8(d)(1)InGeneral. Eachallegationmustbesimple,concise,anddirect.Notechnicalformisrequired. 8(d)(2)AlternativeStatementsofaClaimorDefense. Apartymaysetout2ormorestatementsofaclaimordefensealternativelyor hypothetically,eitherinasinglecountordefenseorinseparateones.Ifapartymakes alternativestatements,thepleadingissufficientifanyoneofthemissufficient. 8(d)(3)InconsistentClaimsorDefenses. Apartymaystateasmanyseparateclaimsordefensesasithas,regardlessofconsistency.

CIVILPROCEDURE V.PLEADINGS
8(d)(e)ConstruingPleadings. Pleadingsmustbeconstruedsoastodojustice. A. DilatoryPleas responsesthatdelayedthesuit Don'taddressthepleaonitsmerits B. PeremptoryPlea forceapleadertotakeapositionaboutthefactualallegationsofthecomplaint PleadingsgivethePthefirstofficialopptytotellhisstoryandgivesDachanceforaquick, inexpensivevictory

CommonLaw Dilatoryor PeremptoryPlea Jurisdiction Suspension Abatement Demurrer Traverse Confessionand Avoidance

RoughTranslation

Ex.

nothere notnow notuntilthisisfixed sowhat

Dassertsthatthiscasedoesnotbelonginafederal court Caseshouldnotproceedb/cDisonactivedutyin armedservicesandunabletodefenduntildischarge Dassertscasebroughtitwrongvenue Dassertsthatallegationsofthecomplaintdonotstate aclaim

didnthappenorIdidnt doit yesbut

Conleyv.Gibson
Acomplaintshouldnotbedismissed"unlessitappearsbeyonddoubtthatthecanprove nosetoffactsinsupportofhisclaimwhichwouldentitlehimtorelief." Thecourtwouldjustsortoutthevalidityoftheclaimthroughdiscovery,pretrialmotions, ortrial Wasthelawfor50years,onlydismissediftherewasnowaytoproveit.

Haddlev.GarrisonAppliedConleynocauseofaction,becausethereisnosetoffacts

Lawyerstakefactsandpresenttheminawaythatwouldbeapplicabletoalegalclaim MotiontoDismissfailuretostateaclaimsufficiencyofclaim. Rule12(b)(6)Motionfailuretostateaclaiminthecomplaint Nocauseofactionpleadedcorrectlybutdoesn'tmatterbecausethereisnocauseof action Rationale:Courtshouldnotdismissacomplaintforfailuretostateaclaimunlessitisclearthat thePcanprove"nosetoffactsinsupportofhisclaimwhichwouldentitlehimtorelief." Tomakeoutacauseofactionthismusthavesufferedanactualinjury

BellAtlanticv.TwomblyConceivabletoPlausibleTest
Psdidnotallegethatanymeetings,memosorotherevidenceofanagreementtorestraint trade. Rule8(a)(2)statesthatthecomplaintisinsufficient.Psmustallegeenoughtoshowthat theirclaimis"plausible"notjustconceivable. Holding:

CIVILPROCEDURE V.PLEADINGS
Factualallegationsmustbeplausiblejustenoughtostateaclaimofrelief Onassumptionthatallegationsaretrue Cantjuststateconclusions Musthavefactualmatter TakeAway:Antitrustconspiracywasnotsuggestedbythefactsadducedundereither theoryofthecomplaint,whichfailstostateaclaim. NEEDTOALLEGESOMEFACTSFROMWHICHACONSPIRACYCANBEINFERRED

Ashcroftv.Iqbal
ClassNotes:"Rule8marksanotableandgenerousdeparturefromthehypertechnical, codepleadingregimeofapriorera,butitdoesnotunlockthedoorsofdiscoveryforaP armedwithnothingmorethanconclusion." Rationale: Theallegationscannotbeconclusory Theremustbefacts,assumedastrue,tostateaclaimthatisplausibleonitsface Conley "NoSetofFacts" Twombly Conceivable>Plausible suggestheightened pleadingantitrust Iqbal saidthatTwomblyhadheightenedpleading forantitrust,butnotforeverything. Holding:Expandsheightenedpleadingto ALLCIVILCLAIMS

HowandwhyhasTwomblyandIqbalchangedtheequation? HowChanginghowcasesarepleadrequires"factpleading"underwhichamustalsoallege supportingevidenceofaviolation o Pwillhavetoallegesomefactualsupporttoshowthatshehasaviableclaim. o Canpleadsimpleclaimsingeneralterms WhyGettingridoffrivolouscases o Shiftsbalancetos o Systemistooclogged o Heightenedpleadingstandard o Sufficientfactualmatter

SpecialPleadings

Rule9(a)Fraudcangivepunitivedamages (a)CapacityorAuthoritytoSue;LegalExistence. (1)InGeneral. Exceptwhenrequiredtoshowthatthecourthasjurisdiction,apleadingneednotallege: (A)apartyscapacitytosueorbesued; (B)apartysauthoritytosueorbesuedinarepresentativecapacity;or (C)thelegalexistenceofanorganizedassociationofpersonsthatismadeaparty. (2)RaisingThoseIssues. Toraiseanyofthoseissues,apartymustdosobyaspecificdenial,whichmuststateany supportingfactsthatarepeculiarlywithinthepartysknowledge. (b)FraudorMistake;ConditionofMind. Inallegingfraudormistake,apartymuststatewithparticularitythe circumstancesconstitutingfraudormistake.Malice,intent,knowledge,andotherconditionsofa person'smindmaybeallegedgenerally. SpecialPleadingRequirements 1. Iflegislatureidentifies"disfavored"claims,onetoolistocreatespecialpleadingregimes a. HeightenedpleadingrequirementsforMedMal

CIVILPROCEDURE V.PLEADINGS
b. Perceptionwasthatmedmalpracticewerefrivolouspressuredoctorsandins.Costo settlewithPs 2. Expensive!Discoveryisexpensiveandtimeconsuming

Stradfordv.ZurichInsuranceCo.FraudulentDentist

Problem:6didnotidentifyanyparticularmisrepresentation.nmovestodismissthefraudclaims forfailuretostatetheclaimswithsufficientparticularityunderFRCP9(b). Rule:Whereapartyisaccusedoffraud,FRCP9(b)requiresthetime,place,andnatureofthe allegedmisrepresentationstobedisclosedtothepartyaccusedoffraud. Issue:Mustapartyidentifyspecificallegedmisrepresentationswhenaccusingapartyoffraud? Holding:Yes.FRCP9(b)providesthatallallegationsoffraudshallbestatedwithparticularity,and thatallegationsofintentmaybesetforthgenerally. TheprimarypurposeofRule9(b)istoaffordalitigantaccusedoffraudfairnoticeoftheclaim andthefactualgrounduponwhichitisbased. AllocatingElementsofaClaim >Whicheverpartyhastheburdenofpleadinganissuemustalsoproduceevidenceto demonstratethatallegationattrial

Jonesv.Blockprisoner(adminremedies)
RuleofLaw:APneednotpleadanddemonstrateexhaustionofadministrativeremediesinthe complaint TakeAway:"[F]ailuretoexhaustinanaffirmativedefenseunderthePLRA[PrisonLitigation ReformAct]andinmatesarenotrequiredtospeciallypleadordemonstrateexhaustionintheir complaints." PolicyRationale:Thereasonsbehindthedecisionsofsomelowercourtstoimposeapleading requirementonnsinthiscontext,whicharetoseparate,whenitcomestoprisonersuits,those claimsthathavemeritandthosethathavenoneandwillmerelyclogtheprocess,are understandable.Butthewaytoestablishhigherpleadingrequirementsistoamendtherules,not onacasebycasebasisincourts. Thiscaseisaboutlegalrequirements(likeHaddle)Technicaldefect,butaboutspecificity. Whohastheburdenofproof?Dhastoshowthatthepleadingisinsufficient. HaddleDhadburdenofproof ZurichDhadburdenofproof JonesDhadtheburdenofproof

CIVILPROCEDURE VI.ETHICALLIMITSINPLEADINGS I. EthicalLimitationsinPleading

Rule11 Coverseveryaspectoflitigationthatinvolvesawrittendocument Technicallyastandardofprofessionalresponsibilityorconduct Rule11isnecessarytomaintaintheintegrityoftheFRCP ThecentralpurposeofRule11istodeterbaselessfilingsindistrictcourts. note:Notdiscovery11(d)exceptionthough Everypleading,writtenmotion,andotherpapermustbe signedbyatleastoneattorneyofrecordintheattorney's 11(a) Pleadings SigningPapers name Claimsareformedafterreasonableinquiry:1.nottoharass Representationstothe 2.warrantedbyexistinglaw3.factshaveevidentiary 11(b) Pleadings Court support 11(c) Pleadings Sanctions If11(b)isviolated,courtcouldgivesanctions Rule3.1MeritoriousClaimsandContentions Statesthataclaimhastobebasedonlawandgoodfaithbasis(facts)forfilingsuchaclaim. Thisisaruleonprofessionalconductandviolatingitcouldpotentiallyleadtodisciplinaryaction bythebarorresultinliabilitytosomeone. Rule3.1vs.Rule11 Theybothaddressgoodfaith. Rule11islimitedtopaperwork. Theyaresetupunderdifferingbodiesoflawandgovernedunderdifferingauthorities. Rule11attycertifiesthattobestofperson'sknowledge

Walkerv.NorthwestCorp.notdiversityjurisdictioninpleadings Pwassupposedtopleadthecitizenshipofthepartiestoinvokediversityjurisdictionfailedto dothisanddidnotdismissthecomplaint. Thecourtappropriatelyawardedsanctionsb/cofhisdefectivecomplaint Rule:AnawardofmonetarysanctionspursuanttoFRCP11isproperwhereanattorneyhasfileda defectivecomplaintwithoutsubsequentlyamendingordismissingthecomplaint..

Christianv.Mattell,Inc.throwingBarbies
Pfailedtoinvestigatepriortofilecomplaint,thenhemisbehavedduringdepo. Rule:Rule11permitsthecourttosanctionanattorneyonlyforconductregardingpleadings, writtenmotions,andotherpapersthathavebeensignedandfiledinagivencase. itdoesnotauthorizesanctionsfordiscoveryabusesormisstatementsmadetothecourtduringan oralpresentation.


1. Default 2. PreAnswerMotion 3. Answer

CIVILPROCEDURE VI.RESPONDINGTOCOMPLAINT

Howdopeoplerespondtolawsuits?

RespondingtotheComplaint

1. Default

a. Ifyoufailtorespond,youcanhaveadefaultjudgmentRule55 i. Amountofdamagesmustbedecidedbeforedefaultjudgment ii. Dcanbeheardonthisissue

2. PreAnswerMotion
b. TypesofPreAnswerMotions(Rule12) 12(b)Motions:Somethingiswrongw/thiscase.Can'tbeadjudicated. 1. Lackofsubjectmatterjurisdiction 2. Lackofpersonaljurisdiction 3. Impropervenue 4. Insufficientprocess 5. Insufficientserviceofprocess 6. Failuretostateclaimuponreliefcanbegranted 7. FailuretojoinapartyunderRule19 Whenputtingtogetheracomplaint,youhavetoknowRule12,sothatyoucanwin aMtoDismiss.

Rule12(h)ApartywaivesanydefenselistedinRule12(b)(25)by a. Omittingitfromaresponsivepleading b. Youcanfile12(b)(6)and12(b)(7)canberaisedthroughtrial a. Can'tbethroughappeal c. 12(b)(1)canberaisedanytimeeventhroughappeal a. Rule12(e)MotionforaMoreDefinitiveStatement Ifpleadingissovagueorambiguousthataresponsivepleadingcouldnotbe framed,thenitwouldbesubjectto12(b)(6)motion Rule12(f)MotiontoStrike MtoStrikeany"redundant,immaterial,impertinent,orscandalousmatter." Allowspartytochallengeapartofapleadingthatfailsundersubstantivelaw, eventhoughtherestofthepleadingstatesaclaimordefense. OR Forcesremovalofirrelevantandprejudicialallegationsinapleading. Iftheyhavenorelation,frivolous.Unnecessarilylong Rule12(c)MotionforJudgmentonthePleadings IfintheanswerthePhasn'tdeniedanyoftheallegationsofthecomplaintthe Pcanmoveforajudgmentonthepleadings Dwouldstatethattheydidcommitactbutforacertainreason.

CIVILPROCEDURE VI.RESPONDINGTOCOMPLAINT
Courtwould"matchup"theallegationsofthecomplaintandthoseofthe answeranddecidewhetherjudgmentforthePshouldbeenteredonthe basisofthepleadings Casemaybedecidedonamforjudgmentonthepleadingsifthecourtthought thelawclearandfurtherdevelopmentofthefactswouldnotassistindeciding thecase.

Camposv.INS
1. CourtcitedSanders 5. ClaimedthatPfailedtoexhaustadministrativeremedies.Wasthereenough"legal standard"factstoproveconsistentwiththeallegationsunderfreedomof informationact?DarguedthatSection8hasnorightofactionagainsttheagency inchargeofit. a. DueProcesssubstantiveandprocedural. i. Substantivethereisnofundamentalrighttobecomean Americancitizen ii. ProceduralAgencydidnotfollowitsownrules Thecourtdecidedagainstthe i.

Rule12(b)(1)subjectmatterjurisdiction Rule12(b)(6)failuretoexhaustremediesandmeetingthelegalstandard

3. Answer

Respondingtothefactualallegations 1. AffirmativeDefense 2. Counterclaimcomplaint a. Suethepartywhosuedyouback b. Requiresareply 3. CrossClaimComplaint a. Sueoneofthefellowpartiesonthesameside b. Ex.CivilActionifBeatricesuedGrace 4. ThirdpartyClaimcomplaint a. WhenDsuesanotherpersonbecausetheyfeeltheyaretruly responsible b. Ex.LennarsuingBanner a. Denial i. Dmustrespondtoanyfactualallegationsdenyingorraisingsomeadditional matterconstitutingadefense. ii. Rule8(b)Defenses;AdmissionsandDenial iii. Rule8(b)(6)anyallegationnotdeniedisdeemedadmitted b. GeneralDenial 1. Partiesdenyeverything

Zielinskiv.PhiladelphiaPiers,Inc.Forkliftcasegeneral denial
Rule8(b)partyshallstatehisdefensestoeachclaiminamannerthatfairly meetsthesubstanceoftheallegationswhichthepartyintendstodeny ItisanineffectivedenialforDtodenyPsallegationthatDowned,operated, andcontrolledaforklift,butdidnotoperateandcontrolit c. AffirmativeDefenses i. Rule8(c)listisnotexhaustive(canincludemorethanwhatisonthelist) 4. Reply

CIVILPROCEDURE VI.RESPONDINGTOCOMPLAINT
a. Pmustreplyif:answercontainscounterclaim(anditislabeledassuch) i. Rule7(a)(3)requiresareply ii. Mustbelabeled"counterclaim" b. Courtmayorderareplyonitsownmotionormotionofaparty

5. Amendments
Rule15
Amendmentof Complaints"as amatterof course" allowsapartytoamenditspleadingonce w/oobtainingcourtpermission.Mustbe within21daysofwhencomplaintis served

15(a)

Beec onlydeniedifpartycan Obtainingcourt Afterdeadlineorasecondtimemust kv. showprejudiceor permissionto obtainotherparty'sconsentorpermission Aqua defectinpleadingwas 15(a)(2) amend ofthecourt slide neglectorcarelessness Amending duringorafter partycanamendcomplaintaftertrialw/ 15(b) trial court'spermission Amendmentstorelatebacktothedateof theoriginalpleading.Partywantstoadd Relationback somenewclaimsAFTERSOLexpired.New 15(c) ofamendments Claimswillnotbebarred Allowedtosupplementoriginalpleadings Supplemental andaddnewmattersmustbefactsthat ALWAYSREQUIRE 15(d) Pleadings ariseaftertheoriginalpleadingwasfiled COURT'SPERMISSION 3requirements: a. MustariseoutofthesameT/Oastheoriginalclaim b. D2hadnotice,withintheperiodfordeliveryoftheoriginalcomplainttoD1 c. D2kneworshouldhaveknownthat,burforamistakeastotheidentityoftheproper party,theoriginalactionwouldhavebeenagainsthim. d. TheSOLDefensecanlaterberaisedinarule15cmotionforjudgmentonthe pleadings,orinsummaryjudgmentbutithastobePLED

Beeckv.Aquaslide
TherewasnoevidenceofunduedelaybecauseAquaslideanditsinsurerweresufficiently diligentininvestigatingtheaccident. RuleofLaw:Rule15(a)Acourtmaygrantleavetoamendananswer,withoutabusingits discretion,intheabsenceofanyapparentordeclaredreason,suchasunduedelay,badfaith,or undueprejudicetotheopposingparty,onthepartofthepartyseekingleave.

Moorev.BakerNegligentDoctorcase

Facts:Pfiledinitialcomplaintoflackofinformedcomplaint(daybeforeSOL),thenwantedto addnegligenceduringsurgery FRCP15(c)SOLbarsPfromaddingnewclaimincomplaintb/cclaimdoesntrelateback amendmentrelatesbacktotheoriginalfilingwhenevertheclaimordefenseassertedinthe amendedpleadingaroseoutofthesameconduct,transaction,oroccurrencesetforthor attemptedtobesetforthintheoriginalpleading.: RuleofLaw:UnderFRCPl5(c),aproposedamendmentmustariseoutofthesameconduct, transaction,oroccurrencesetforthorattemptedtobesetforthintheoriginalpleadingin ordertorelatebacktothetimethattheoriginalcomplaintwasfiled.

CIVILPROCEDURE VI.RESPONDINGTOCOMPLAINT Bonerbv.RichardJ.CaronFoundation

Facts:Pbroughtanegligenceclaimandthentriedtobringamalpracticeclaim,butbarredb/c of2yearSOL Issue:Mayanotherwisetimebarredclaimbasedonnegligentprofessionalmalpracticerelate backtoanoriginalclaimbasedonnegligentmaintenanceofpremises? Holding:Yes.UnderFRCP15(a) Rationale:Inthiscase,theoriginalcomplaintallegedthatD'sbasketballcourtwasnegligently maintained,andthatb,engagedinnegligentconduct.Theproposedamendmentallegesthatn wascausedtofallwhileparticipatinginD'sexerciseprogram,andthattherehabilitationand counselingcarerenderedwasnegligentlyperformed.Theallegationsintheoriginaland amendedcomplaintsderivefromthesamenucleusofoperativefactsinvolvingn'sinjury. Becausetheoriginalcomplaintadvisedb,ofthesameoccurrencegivingrisetothedifferent theoriesofnegligence,andtherehasbeennoshowingofunduedelay,badfaith,orundue prejudice,therequirementsforrelationbackunderRule15(c)havebeenmet. RuleofLaw:Relationbackisonlyproperiftheoperationalfactssetforthintheoriginal complaintalertedthetothepossibilityoftheclaimthatthepartyseekingtheamendment laterattemptstoadd.

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION Discovery

Discoveryendslawsuitsfor2reasons: 1. Producesinfoaboutthemeritsofthelawsuitandpermitspartiestomakeinformedjudgments aboutthestrengthoftheirandtheiropponentspositions a. Canendinsettlementorinsummaryjudgment Stages:26(a) SummaryofDiscoveryRules2637 Discoverybeginsnoww/MandatoryDisclosuresinitiatedbyparties o Whatyoumustsharew/otherpartiesthatyouwillusetosupportyourclaim Hastoberelevanttoaclaimordefenseandnonprivilegednotjustsubjectmatterunlessjudge approves Possibletoobtaindiscovery

PossibilitiesofDiscovery 1. Relevancesettingthestandardfordiscovery

MagnaCartaofModernDiscovery A. Rule26(b)(1)setsoutthegeneralstandardfordeterminingwhether informationcanbediscovered Apartycandiscoverinformationrelatingtoany"nonprivilegedmatter thatisrelevanttoaparty'sclaimordefense"withoutthecourt'sapproval Privilegeprotectsinformationfrombeingdisclosedbyaparticular sourcebutthepartymaystillobtaintheinfofromothersources Ifitshows"goodcause"courtmaygrantbroaderdiscoveryofmatter relevanttosubjectmatter. 1. Relevancedefinesrelationshipinformationtendstoproveordisprove somethingthegoverningsubstantivelawsaysmatters. Relevanceisalowthreshold. Informationisrelevantaslongasitmayhelpapartyprepareits case. Neednotnecessarilybeevidencethepartywillbeusedattrial

Davisv.PrecoatMetals(2002)
PssuedDfordiscrimination.PsaskedDtodiscloseallcomplaintsthat nonclericalemployeeshadbroughtagainsttheDforraceandnat'lorigin discriminatedduringacertaintimeperiod RuleofLaw:Discoveryrequestsareproperwheretheyarenarrowly tailoredtospecificallegationsatissueinthecase.Thecourtheldthatthe informationsoughtwasrelevantb/citcouldbeusedtodemonstrate thatD'sallegedbasisfortakingactionagainstthePwasamerepretext. Andtherequestswerenarrowlytailored

Steffanv.Cheney
Facts:pleadedtheFifthAmendmentprivilegeagainstself incriminationwhenaskedinadepositionifhehadengagedin homosexualconductduringorafterhistenureasamidshipman. objectedthatthequestionswerenotrelevanttotheissueofhisalleged discharge. Issue:MayapartybesanctionedunderFRCP37{b)(2)forfailureto complywithadiscoveryorderwheretherequestedinformationisnot relevanttotheaction?

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
Holding/Rationale:Thefactthatseeksreinstatementdoesnotmake thequestionofwhetherheengagedinhomosexualconductrelevant becauseitwasnotthebasisforhisseparation. RuleofLaw:AsanctionunderFRCP37{b)(2)forfailuretocomplywitha discoveryorderisimproperwheretherequestedinformationisnot relevanttotheaction. Privilege CouldbechargedcriminallyFifthAmendmentnottoansweron basisofrightnottoincriminate

Spoliationpreservingevidencefordiscovery Silvestriv.GeneralMotorsCorp

StagesofDiscovery
1. 1.

Facts:Didnotpreservehiscarinaproductscase Holding:Aparty'sdutytopreservematerialevidenceextendstotheperiod beforelitigation,whenapartyreasonablyshouldknowthattheevidencemay berelevanttoanticipatedlitigation,andthereforetheobjectofdiscovery. RuleofLaw:Aparty'sdutytopreservematerialevidenceextendstotheperiod beforelitigation,whenapartyreasonablyshouldknowthattheevidencemay berelevanttoanticipatedlitigation,andthereforetheobjectofdiscovery. NoDiscoveryRulebutsourceofPowerisinRule37allowsanctions. InherentPoweractasjusticesorequires.DueProcessFundamentallyUnfair

2.

1.

2.

Rule26 Providesacatalogueofdisclosureanddiscoverymethodsanddefinesthegroundrules Rule26(f)DiscoveryConference Requirestheparty"tomeetassoonaspracticable"todiscusstheclaimsanddefensesthat havebeenfiledand whetherthereisanypossibilityofsettlement. Ifnosettlementisreached,partiesmustcreateadiscoveryplanforthecase DiscoveryPlancoversthesubjectsonwhichdiscoveryistohad,timingandformof mandatorydisclosuresanddiscovery Candiscusslimitsorrelaxlimitsprescribedbyrules PrereqtoDiscoveryPartiesmaynotengageinformaldiscoveryuntilaftertheformal conference Rule26(d)(1) MandatoryDisclosure Asidemustpresentanythingthatisgoingtohelptheirownclaimordefenses Don'thavetoproduceanythingfortheothersideuntilitisspecificallyaskedRFPorRoggs Rule26(a)(1)InitialDisclosures i. 14Daysafterdiscoveryconference [Rule26(a)(1)(c)] FollowingMustbeDisclosed: 1. thenameand,ifknown,theaddressandtelephonenumberofeachindividuallikelyto havediscoverableinformationthatthedisclosingpartymayusetosupportitsclaimsor defenses alongwiththesubjectsofthatinformation acopyoradescriptionbycategoryandlocationofalldocuments,electronically storedinformation,andtangiblethingsthatthedisclosingpartyhasinitspossession, custody,orcontrolandmayusetosupportitsclaimsordefenses

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
acomputationofeachcategoryofdamagesclaimedbythedisclosingpartywith supportingdocumentation anyinsuranceagreementunderwhichaninsurancebusinessmaybeliablethatmay apply c. Rules26(a)(2)and26(a)(3)PretrialDisclosures Requiresthepartiestodiscloseadditionalinformationtootherpartiesasthedatefortrial drawsnear a. ExpertTestimonyRule26(a)(B)(i)(vi) b. LayWitnessesRule26(a)(3)(i)and(ii) c. TangibleEvidenceRule26(a)(iii) Timing:MustbemadeLayWitnessandTangibleevidencemustbemade30daysbeforetrial and90daysforexpertwitnesses Note:Rule26(e)Ifyougetnewdiscoverythatisrelevanttoyourclaimordefense,youmust discloseit. TheseareenforcedbyRule37 1. InterrogatoriesandAdmissions(Rules33,36,37) 1. Interrogatorieswrittenquestionsthattherecipientanswerunderoath Rule33 1. Availabilityinterrogatoriesmayonlybeagainstparties i. Note:youcansendroggstononparties,buttheyareundernoobligationto answer 2. LimitonNumber:Rule33(a) i. Preventsapartyfromservingmorethan25Qsonanyotherparty ii. Partiesmustseekpermissionofcourtbeforeaskingmorethan25Qs iii. Eachsubpartcountsasaseparatequestion 3. Answers i. Answersareunderoathandmustbesigned ii. Mustbeansweredw/in30daysRule33(b)(2) iii. DutytoInvestigateifpartydoesn'tknowanswerfrompersonalknowledge, theyhaveadutytolookitup. iv. Rule33(d)ifthereisaburdentofindrecordsonthepartybeingasked,the partycanjustspecifywhereitisandtheaskingpartycanlookforitself 4. Objections i. Rule33(b)(4)objectionsmustbestatedw/specificitywhythequestionis objectionable ii. Otherpartymayobtainanorderrequiringthemtoanswer. iii. Rule33(a)(2)notobjectionableforpartytoapplylawtofact. 2.RequestforAdmissionsRule36 WhenAvailable i. Usableonlyagainstparties ii. Usuallyusedtowardstheendofdiscovery iii. Similartoapleadingwhatissuesremainindispute b. Whatmayberequested i. Anythingwithinthescopeofdiscovery Including:opinionsoffactortheapplicationoflawtoafact. b. Can'tobject: i. Becauseitiscruxofthecase ii. Issuethatshouldbeprovedattrial c. Process

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
Seeksadmissionbyservingarequest. Nolimitonnumberofquestion Otherpartymay: 1. Admitthematteristrue 2. Denythetruthofthematter 3. Stateindetailreasonswhypartycannotadmitordeny 4. Object Note:Ifyoudon'tdeny,youadmit 3.RequestforProduction(Rule34and35) Allowsonepartyinspectdocsandtangiblethingsinpossessionofanotherparty a. PartiesOnlyusedparties,partymustmakeitavailableunderinspectionevenin someoneelse'spossessionunderparty'scontrol i. NonpartiesRule45(a)(1)(C) 1. Mustrequestdocsorinspectionsfromnonparties b. Procedure i. Mustservearequestuponthepartyinpossession ii. Theotherpartymustfilearesponsew/in30daysindicatingwhetherinspection willbeallowedoranygroundsofobjection c. DutytoPreserveInformation i. IssuewithElectronicInfo

Zublakev.USBWarburg
Lookingforemailsthatacompanyhad.Saidtherewasabadfaithactionin destroyingfiles.AskedforAdverseInferenceinstruction Holding:Dviolateditsdutytopreservecertainimportantinfowheniterased backuptapes.NosanctionsbecausethePcouldn'tdemonstratetheissue would'vehelpedherprevailinthecase NoAdverseInferenceemailssofarweren'tthatrelevant d. "Costofproduction"Rule34requiresthatapartymustproducedocumentsasthey arekeptintheusualcourseofbusinessormustorganizeorlabelthemtocorrespond tothecategoriesintherequest Seedocs,digitalinfoandvariousobjectsthatwerelistedduringinitialdisclosure Physicalandmentalexamsofparties(Rule35) Needspecialapplicationtothecourt(unlessthepartygettingexamconsents)anda showingofgoodcausetobalanceneedagainstissuesofprivacy Subjecttosanctionsforrefusaltosubjectexamination,butcannotbeheldincontempt 4. Depositions(Rule2732) Witness,underoath,beingaskedquestions Transcribedbycourtreporter/orvideotapped Whomaybedeposed? Maybeusedagainstpartiesandnonparties LimitonAvailability o Cannotexceed10deposperparty(Rule30(a)(2)) o Cannotexceedadayof7hours Exceptiontocourt'slackofinvolvement o Inprison o Nopersonmaybedeposeda2ndtimew/opermissionofcourtorotherside o Orifthisisthe11+depooftheparty o HowInitiated a. Party

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
i. Placesnoticestoappearandanswerquestions ii. Mayberequiredtotravel b. Nonparty i. Maygiveanotice,butinordertoobligatethemtoshowup,youneeda subpoenaRule45 Witnessesmustanswerorallyunderoath Lawyercanfollowupw/furtherquestionsifthewitnessisevasive

EnsuringCompliance(Rule26(g)and37)
a.

JudgessuperviseDiscovery i. Courtmayimposepunishmentsrangingfromawardsofexpensestodismissalsof anentirecaseortheentryofadefaultjudgmentRule37 o SigningofDiscoveryRule26(g) Requirespartiestosigndisclosures o Mandatorydisclosuresandallrequests,responsesandobjectionsbesigned o Anattorneyofrecord,unlessthere'snoatty,thenpartyofrecordmustsign Reasonableinquiry MandatoryDisclosurecompleteandcorrect Consistentw/rules Warrantedbylaw,notmadeforanyimproperpurpose,notburdensome Ifviolated,maysanctionw/atty'sfees CompellingDiscoveryRule37(a) o Punishespartiesforunjustifiedrequestsandrefusalswhenparties'behaviordoesn't violateacourtorder Rule37(c) failuretodisclose,tosupplementearlierresponse

Rule37(d) Awardsofexpenses Casedismissal Defaultjudgment Pleadingsmaybestruck EvidenceRule606Financialstatusofaisnotrelevanttoaclaimforcompensatorydamagesina negligentcase Becauseitisprejudicial

partywillnotbeallowedtousetheinfoatmotion,hearing,trial

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION LimitationsonDiscoveryinanAdversarySystem

o

PrivilegeRule26(b)(1):discover"anynonprivilegedmatterthatisrelevant.."

A.

C. D. 5.

Absolutebartodisclosurethatprotectsothersidefromobtaininginformationfromcertain sources. Privilegedealswithsourcenotrelevance Waiver o failuretoassertitorbydisclosingittoanotherparty Attorneyclientprivilege a. Appliesonlytocommunicationsrelatedtoseekinglegaladvice Appliestocommunicationsbtwlawyerandclient,notunderlyingfactsordocs Includespaperorelectroniccommunicationsaswellasverbalones Waiver:Attorneyareneversupposedtowaiveitw/oclientauthorization,buttheycanand do,sometimesinadvertently Clientscanwaivebutattysshouldwarnthemagainstdoingso Ifthereisawitnessinterviewopposingcounselcanonlyviewitifthereisunduehardship DoctorPatient PwaivesaDPprivilegebybringingasuit Doctorcan'tdiscloseinformationaboutyou Spousal Givesrighttopreventaspousefromdisclosinginforelayedinconfidence FedPrivacyAct 5thAmendmentSelfIncrimination a. Havetoadmitliabilityinacivilcase b. Can'tbeforcedtoadmitsomethingthatwouldcauseyoutobeconvictedofacrime o Privilegescanbewaivedbyfailingtoassertit,orbytakingsomeactioninconsistentwithclaiming theprivilegesuchasdisclosingtheprivilegedmaterialtoathirdparty. Docsthatareremovedfromproductionwouldbelistedona"privilegelogprovidedto thepartyrequestingdocs. a. Sufficientinfoaboutthedocument. b. Otherpartycancontesttheprivilege o PrivilegeWaiver o Rule30(d)(3) MayallowclienttogetaMotionforProtectiveOrder

TrialPreparationMaterial(WorkProduct)
Rule26(B)(3)Partymaynotdiscoveranydocumentpreparedinanticipationoflitigationfortrialparty wouldhavetoshowunduehardshiptoobtainit Opposingpartiesmustrepresenttheirowninterestswhileconductingthecaseinconformity withtherules Requiresopposingcounseltocooperatewitheachother Preventsonesidefrompiggybackingontheworkoftheotherbyforcingeachpartyto prepareitsowncase,therulehelpstoensurethattheadversarysystemworksasintended

Hickmanv.Taylorin1947(predecessortoRule26(b)(3)

Facts:Attyinterviewedsurvivingmembersofanaccident.Opposingdocrequestedtoproducethem RuleofLaw:Anattorney'smemorandaandmentalimpressionsreflectingoralstatementsofwitnesses madeinpreparationforlitigationarenotsubjecttodiscoverywherethepartyseekingdiscoveryhas notmadeashowingthattheinformationrequestedisnecessaryandthatdenialofdiscoverywould undulyprejudicethatparty'scase.

Usuallybelongstotheatty,nottheclient(buttherecanbeclientworkproduct26b3 Evenso,atty'smentalimpressions,legaltheories,opinions,conclusionsusuallyundiscoverable Protectingrelevant,unprivilegedmaterial

o o

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION

Protectiveorder Rule26(c)balancesneedagainst collateralharm Lotsofjudicialdiscretionaboutwhether andhowtoprotect Notaboutprivileges(protectsagainst unprivilegedmaterials

WorkProduct Rule23(b)(3)protectsmaterialproducedby andforlit Ifitstrialprep,notdiscoverableunless...

Protectsmaterialsproducedforandby litigations

Rule26(B)(3)predecessorwasHickmanstandard ExpertInformationRule26(b)(4)
o Mustberelevant o Reliableinatestablebodyofknowledgeandisqualifiedtotestifyabouttheparticular o WorkProductDoctrine

dispute.

ControllingDiscoveryAbuses
o

Rule26(a)(2) 90daysbeforetrial(30daysforrebuttaltestimony)thepartiesidentify expertswhomaytestify Needbiooftheexpert+writtenreportofallopinionsthewitnesswill expressandthebasisandreasonsforthem Expertstypicallytestifytotheinferencesonecandrawaboutcauses ofaneventbyapplyingtheirspecialknowledgetotheevidence available Rule26(b)(4)add'ldiscoveryfromexperts: Testifyingexpertssubmittopretrialdepo 26(b)(4)(a)TestifyingExperts Canbefreelydeposed 26(b)(4)(b)NontestifyingExperts Thefactsheknowstheopinionshehasarenotdiscoverable Inordertodeposethem,theyneedtoshowneed Likeifthefactarenolongeravailable

ToolittleDiscovery(stonewalling) Onepartyresistsappropriaterequestsfordiscovery o ToomuchDiscovery Seeksmorediscoverythanonecasejustifies o MismatchedDiscovery 2partieshavesignificantlyunequallitigationresources. Solutiondependsmoreonlitigationfinancemechanismsthandiscovery rules Badbehaviorindiscovery Lawyerscooperatingw/eachotherw/ocourt'ssupervisionmustshowyouareingood faith Designedtohappenoutsideofcourtorjudge'ssupervision w/judgesbecominginvolvedonlywhenthereisadispute Rule37(a)

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
Needtomeetandconfer,thenfileamotiontocompel. Punishments: Sanctions Rule26(g)and37(b)(2) Onlyexceptiontomitigateasanctionisapendingprotectiveorder.

ProtectiveOrder

Declinetoanswer ProtectiveOrder[Rule26(c)]permitsacourttolimitdiscovery,even thoughtheinfosoughtmightotherwisebediscoverableifitwouldproduce "annoyance,embarrassment,oppression,orundueburdenorexpense." a. Forbiddingthedisclosureordiscovery b. Specifyingterms,includingtimeandplace,forthedisclosureor discovery c. Forbiddinginquiryintocertainmatters,orlimitingthescopeof disclosureordiscoverytocertainmatters Ex.Davismightwanttoredactpplsnameorpersonal identifyingmaterialinordertoprotectotheremployees privacy

Thompsonv.TheHaskellCo.ProtectiveOrder
Facts:Psawpsychologistrightaftershewasassaultedbyanemployeewantstoprotect herthoughts.arguingthatFRCP26(b)(4)protectsthedocuments, Holding/Rationale:Thepsychologist'sassessmentof'semotionalstateonJune15, 1992,tendaysafterhertermination,ishighlyprobativewithregardto'sallegationsof herdepressedmentalstateandthenatureofhertermination.Dshowedunduehardship b/ccouldntproducesimilarreportThisisanexceptiontotheMPOrule DiscoveryandPrivacy Unnecessaryintrusionsintoprivatemattersarecommonreasonsforaprotective order. Canbeusedtopressuretheotherpartyintosettlement Rule26(g)forbidsabusivediscovery Rule26(c)MotionforProtectiveOrder Canforbiddiscoveryaltogetherorlimitthetimingorscopediscovery Rule26(c)(1)preventpartyfromannoyance,embarrassment,oppression, orundueburdenorexpense Rule35Limitsmentalandphysicalexaminations Rule5(d)(1)mustusethedocbeforeyoucanfileit Unlitigatedcaseswillnotyielddiscoverythatcanbeusedinfuturecases.

4.

Remedies:ManagementandSanctions

Dutytopreserve a. Obligationtopreserveevidenceariseswhenthepartyhasnoticethatthe evidenceisrelevanttolitigationorwhenapartyshouldhaveknownthatthe evidencemayberelevanttofuturelitigation TriggerDatedateofcomplaintorwhenyouanticipatelitigation ScopeDon'thavetopreserveeverything a. Partyneednotpreserveallbackuptapesevenwhenitreasonablyanticipates litigation b. Mustnotdestroyunique,relevantevidencethatmightbeusefultoanadversary.

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
c. Reasonablylikelytoberequestedduringdiscoveryorissubjectofapending discoveryrequest 4. Whomustpreservediscovery? a. Anyindividuals"likelytohavediscoverableinformationalongw/thesubjectsof thatinfothatthedisclosingpartymayusetosupportitsclaimsordefenses b. Docspreparedforindividuals c. Dutytopreserveextendstothosethathaverelevantinfo"keyplayers" 5. Whatmustberetained? a. Allrelevantdocsinexistenceatthetimedutytopreserveattachesandany relevantdocsthereafter SupplementingDisclosuresandResponses(Rule26(e)) Apartymustsupplementitsanswerstoroggs,RFPandReq.forAdmissionsifit learnsthatanearlieranswerorresponsewasincompleteorincorrectinsome materialwayandcorrectinfohasnototherwisebeenmadeknowntotheother parties Note:ifyoudon'tsupplementtootherparties,youarenotallowedtousethis infoatamotion,atahearing,oratatrial,unlessthefailurewassubstantially justifiedorisharmless (A)mayorderpaymentofthereasonableexpenses,including attorney'sfees,causedbythefailure; (B)mayinformthejuryoftheparty'sfailure;and (C)mayimposeotherappropriatesanctions,includinganyofthe orderslistedinRule37(b)(2)(A)(i)(vi).

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION SummaryJudgmentRule56 "Nogenuineissueofmaterialfact"

Alternativetotrialwherefactsarenotdisputed Trialbyaffidavit. Disputeisaboutlaw Mustshowthatdisputedfactualissuespresentedbypleadingsareillusory Orlawisclear,butonepartylackedevidencesupportingacriticalelementofhercase Rule56Makingandgrantingofmotionsforsummaryjudgment o Rule56CMaregrantedwhenrecord"showsthatthereisnogenuineissueastoany materialfactandthatthemovantisentitledtojudgmentasamatteroflaw" FourRelatedstagesofprocedure: 1. Demurrer(12(b)(6)Motionto Canhappenanytime(frompleadingto trial dismiss) o Teststheadequacyofthepleadings o Can'tlookatoutsideaffidavits o Assumethatthefactsinthepleadingsistrue Note:Testsonlylegalframework. o Thereisnoverdict 2. MotionforjudgmentonthepleadingsRule Comesafterthecloseofall 12(c)motion pleading o Complaint o DMUSTfileanswerandinanswer,raisesaffirmativedefense o Dfilesforjudgmentonthepleadings Thecourtwillresolveacasebasedsolelyontheallegationsinthepleadings willassumefacttobetrue. Note:Testsonlylegalframework. 3. Motionforsummary Cancomeanytimeafterpleadings,usuallyafter somediscovery judgment Rule56governs Rule56(c)Whenthereisnoissueofmaterialfact,movantisentitledtoajudgment asamatteroflaw Mustlegalandfactualmeritsofthecase i. Note:denialcreatesanissuethatwouldallowittogototrial Purposeistodecidewhethersuchapresentationis 4. MotionforDirectedVerdict(JudgmentasaMatter Happensattrial ofLaw) aftertrialstarted Whenitisclearfromtheevidencethatonesideshouldprevail,thejudgecouldtake casefromthejurybyenteringjudgmentasamatteroflaw(JML)

Rule12(b)(6)

Rule12(c) Earlyenoughnottodelaytrial

Rule56 SummaryJudgment +20daysaftercomplaint

JNOV Directed Verdict

Complaint

Additional Pleadings

Discovery

Trial

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
MaterialAccompanying Supportingmaterials o Affidavits o Answerstointerrogatories o Transcriptsofdepositions o AmemorandumexplainingwhySJisappropriate Timing PartydefendingclaimmayfileforSJatanytime o Evenbeforeresponsetoclaim ClaimantmaymoveforSJafterdefendingpartymakesitsownmotion o Orafter20daysfollowingcommencementoftheaction Regardlessofwhofilesmotionmustbeservedatleast10daysbeforehearingonthemotion StandardforSJ Puttingtheissueindisputeoftenyouhavetheburdenofproducingandyouhavetoconvince thejurythatXismoreprobablethannot Evidence:ifthereisconflictingevidencejudgmentshouldntbegranted Credibility:courtdoesntdeterminecredibilitythatsthejobforthejury Favor:allevidenceistobeviewedinafavorablelightforthenonmovingparty Inferences:cantbetooimprobableorfarfetched

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION JudicialManagementofLitigation Biasv.AdvantageInternationalInc.

Dmovedforsummaryjudgment Thecourtreasonedthat'sevidencedidnotrebut''claimthatnoinsurerwouldhave issueda$1milliondollarlifeinsurancepolicybecauseofLeonard'scocaineuse. appeals,arguingthatthereisagenuineissueoffactastoLeonard'sinsurability. Holding:No.Thepartymovingforsummaryjudgmentbearstheinitialburdenofshowingthatthe recordbeforethecourtdoesnotrevealanygenuineissuesofmaterialfact.Thenonmovingparty thenhastheburdenofrebuttingthemovant'sshowingbybringingforthspecificfactsestablishing thatthereisagenuineissueofmaterialfact RuleofLaw:Inordertowithstandasummaryjudgmentmotiononcethemovingpartyhasmadea primafacieshowingtosupportitsclaims,thenonmovingpartymustsetforthspecificfacts showingthatthereisagenuineissuefortrial.

Celotexshift InsteadofDhavingtoprovetherewasnoInscothatwouldhavegivenhimapolicy.P'sburdento findoneanditcould'vegottenpolicy.

IfyouhavetheBurdensofProof,thenyouhave: A. BurdenofPleading Pleading Demurrer12b6/12c Whohastoallegewhat? Production Summaryjudgment(Rule56) AppliestoPandD Whatproceduraldevicesenforcethisburden? Production Directedverdict Whatdoesademurrer12(b)(6),or12(c)motiondecide? SOLburdenonDtoplead Persuasion Verdict,judgment BurdenofProduction WhohastofindandPresentevidence? AppliestoBothParties Burdenofproofinsuithastheburdenofproduction Celotex Whatproceduraldevicesenforcethisburden? WhatdoesaMforSJorDirectedVerdictdecide? 3. BurdenofPersuasionscales o Pwouldhavetoprovemorelikelythannot Youhavethejobofconvincingjudgeorjury Preponderanceofevidencestandard Proceduraldevice Directedverdictor Juryverdict Benchdecision Preponderanceoftheevidenceevidencethathasmoreconvincingforcethanthatopposedto it.Iftheevidenceissoevenlybalancedthatyouareunabletosaythattheevidenceoneither sideofanissuepreponderates,yourfindingonthatissuemustbeagainstthepartywhohadthe burdenofprovingit. Evencasesaredecidedagainstthepartywhoseburdenitis

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION DividedAuthorityinCivilLitigation Judgealone,orjudgeandjury?

Jurieswillsitif: Atleastonepartyasksforajury Itisacasewhichpartiesareentitledtoajury Whydoesitmatter? 7thamendmentpreservesrighttojuryforsomeCIVILproceedings,basedonclaimsand remediessought Preservessuitsatcommonlaw

HistoricalReconstructionandtheSeventhAmendment i. Righttojuryclause 2. CourtsofcommonlawContracts,trespass,replevin,ejectment a. Jury b. Youwillhavearighttojurytrialifthetypeofcaseexistedinthe courtofcommonlawin1791 1. Righttojuryclause: a. Insuitsatcommonlaw,wherevalueshallexceed$20,rightto trialbyjuryshallbepreserved b. Whetheranactionwouldhavebeentriabletojuryin1791 EquitableActions nojury Reformation Rescissiontrick Injunctionspecific performance Accounting LegalClaims jury DamagesforK Tort Ejectment Replevin,Trover

SuitforKforDamagesand Jury! Injunction

1.
1. 2.

ApplyingtheHistoricalTesttonewClaims
Findtheclosesthistoricalanaloguetotheactionin18thcenturyBritish practice,anddeterminewhetherthathistoricalanaloguewouldbeheardinlaw orequity Analyzethenatureoftheremedysoughtanddetermineifitislegalor equitableinnature
Breachofaunion'sdutyoffairreptoworkers.Employeessuingtrucking companyandunionwhodidnotrepresentthemfairly.Teamsterswantajury! Arerespondentsentitledtojurytrial?Dutyoffairrepresentation. Reasoning:Judgesweretryingtocomparethiscasetoclaimsavailablein1791. Historicalanalogies.Isitmorelikemalpracticeorbreachofcontract?

Chauffers,Teamsters&Helpers,LocalNo.391v.Terry
Facts: Issue:

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
a. Innatureoftheclaimsolosetoanancientlegalorequitableaction,then you'redone o Equitablebreachoffiduciaryduty Ifthatisnotconclusive,looktotheremedysought Theywereaskingfordamagesthisisequitable Note:TheSecondsteppredominates Brennan TheCourtshouldnolongerneedlesslycomparethesubstantiverightatissueto Concurrence: Englishactionsfrom200yearsago,instead,theCourtshouldfocusonthe natureoftheremedysought. Stevens Thedutyoffairrepresentationmostcloselyresemblesacommonlawaction Concurrence: againstanattorneyformalpractice.TheCourthasoverstatedthisaction's similaritytoanactionagainstatrustee. Kennedy Dissent: TheCourtcorrectlydeterminedthatthedutyoffairrepresentationaction resemblesanequitabletrustactionmorethanasuitformalpractice;however, theCourtshouldhavefoundthisdeterminationsufficienttoconcludethatthe actionwasequitableandthattherewasnorighttoajury

Weberv.JacobsMfg.Co.

AmocoOilv.Torcomian
o

ERISAdidn'texistin1791 Aformeremployeefiledanactionagainsthisformeremployerallegingviolationofthe EmployeeRetirementIncomeSecurityAct(ERISA)andaclaimfornegligent misrepresentationunderstatelaw.Onthe'smotiontodismisspendentstatelaw negligentmisrepresentationclaimandtostrikejurydemand,theDistrictCourt,Clarie, SeniorDistrictJudge,heldthat:(1)exerciseofpendentjurisdictionovernegligent misrepresentationclaimwasproper,and(2)employeewasentitledtojurytrialonall claimsseekingdamagesunderERISA. PsuedD,didntwantajury.Dfiledcompulsorycounterclaim,wantedjury Nojurywouldbeaviolationoftheirconstitutionalrights Incasecombininglegalandequitableclaims,thetrierwhogoesfirstwillbindthe secondtrieronthatissue JURYWILLGOFIRSTONCOMMONELEMENTS RuleofLaw:Thefactthatequitablereliefissoughtinadditiontosubstantiallegalrelief doesnoteliminatearighttoajurytrial. 7THAMENDMENT&ADMINISTRATIVEAGENCIES AdministrativeAgencies=NOJURYTRIAL Agenciescandecidealegalw/ojury: 1. Mustbelitigatedbeforeanagencytribunal 2. Theunderlyingclaimmustbecreatedbycongress 3. Rightbeinglitigatedmustbeapublicright Holding:Administrativeimpositionofpenaltiesforviolatingfederalhealthandsafety regulationsdidnotviolatethe7thAmendment. Rationale:Fineforcasesinwhichpublicrightsarebeinglitigated[casesinwhichthe gov'tsuesinitssovereigncapacitytoenforcepublicrightscreatedbystatutewithinthe powerofCongresstoenact Note:Priorcasessupportadministrativefactfindingonlyinthosesituationsinvolving PUBLICRIGHTSwherethegov'tisinvolvedinitssovereigncapacity

AtlasRoofingv.OccupationalSafety&HealthReviewCommission

ChoosingandChallengingJudgesandJuries
a. AssemblingandChallengingaJuryPool

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION

Judgesareappointedintoofficebythepresident,confirmed 1. Onlyremovedbyimpeachment 2. Someareappointedbutfacereelectionthroughvoting ii. Poolofprospectivejurorsissummoned EqualProtectionClause28USC1861p.381 Whogetsintothepool? Cannotbediscriminatedbyrace,color,religion,sex,nationalorigin,oreconomic status Selectedfromfaircrosssectionofthecommunity Nogroupofmentallycompetentadultcitizenscanbesystematicallyexcludedfrom selection summonjurorsfromvoter'srolls,socialsecurityrecipients,telephonebooks,driver's license lists,welfarelists,collegeregistrationrollsdifferentcharacteristicsineachcase 1867(c)incivilcasesbeforevoirdireexam,orwithinsevendaysafterpartydiscoversmay movetostayproceedingsongroundofsubstantialfailuretocomplywiththeprovisionsof thistitleinselectingthepetitjury

JudgesRecusal
28USC455(a)Whenimpartiality"mightreasonablybequestioned"
28USC455(b)SpecificInstancesRequiringRecusal a. Wherehehasapersonalbiasorprejudiceconcerningaparty,orpersonalknowledgeof disputedevidentiaryfactsconcerningtheproceeding; b. Servedasalawyerinmatterincontroversy
c.

d.

Wherehehasservedingovernmentalemploymentandinsuchcapacityparticipatedas counsel,adviserormaterialwitnessconcerningtheproceedingorexpressedanopinion concerningthemeritsoftheparticularcaseincontroversy; Heknowsthathe,individuallyorasafiduciary,orhisspouseorminorchildresidinginhis household,hasafinancialinterestinthesubjectmatterincontroversyorinapartytothe proceeding,oranyotherinterestthatcouldbesubstantiallyaffectedbytheoutcomeofthe proceeding;

InReBoston'sChildrenFirst
Facts: Rationale:

Canrecuseajudgeby: 1. Partywillfileamotionwiththejudgerequestingrecusal 2. Judgecanrecusethemselvesontheirown 3. Youcanfileawritofmandamusforupperjudgetoforcelowerjudgetorecuse

JudgeGindicatedthatthiscasewas"morecomplex"thanapreviouscase.Was thisstatementcrossingtheline?J Areasonablepersoncouldinterprethercommentsasdoingmorethancorrecting misrepresentationsandcreatinganappearanceofpartiality. Doesn'tneedtoprovethatshewaspartial

Capertonv.A.T.MasseyCoalCo.,Inc.

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
Facts: Judgewaselected,CEOofMasseymade$3millioncontributiontohiscampaign.Decision ofcasewasmadeby1vote.Askedthejudgetorecuse,andherefused. SCfoundthattherewasnoACTUALbias,therewasanimpermissibleriskofbias Benjamin'sfailuretorecusehimselfhadcreatedanunconstitutional"probabilityofbias." DecidedonbasisofDueProcess"Blankenship'ssignificantanddisproportionate influencecoupledwiththetemporalrelationshipbetweentheelectionandthepending case'""offerapossibletemptationtotheaverage...judgeto...leadhimnottoholdthe balancenice,clearandtrue.'""Ontheseextremefactstheprobabilityofactualbiasrises toanunconstitutionallevel."

Holding:

Rationale:

Juries
1.

Challenge a. Forcauseeachpartyusuallyhasanunlimitednumberofchallengesforcause. b. Peremptorilynoarticulatedgroundsforexcusingthejurorfromservice Eachpartygets3

PreviousStandardyoucouldstrikeajurorforanyreason.Includingrace 28USC1870giveseachside3peremptorychallenges,BUT...

Challengefor cause Thompson

failstoassureof impartiality

PeremptoryChallenge Batsonv.Kentucky

28USC1870 incriminalcase,cannotstrike jurorsonabasisofrace.Therehad betterbeareason.Violationof criminalD'srighttoequal protection,nonraciallyskewedjury Incivilcase,can'tstrikejurorson basisofrace.ExtendedBatsonto CivilCases

McDonough

Ifjurorlies.Wasita materialquestion.Would theanswerhavebeen groundsforamaterial challenge?

Edmonsonv.Leesville concreteCo.

J.E.Bv.Alabama Purkettv.Elem

canstrikeonbasisofsexincivil court Struckjurorbecauseoflonghair. SaidlonghairwasOK.Prosecutor offeredinadequateexplanations forpreemptorystrikesofblack jurors[hair,etc.]SCsaidtheseBS explanationsweresufficient. [suddenrelaxedstandardforrace neutralexplanations] Usingtrickquestionsonlywhen testingtheblackjurors

MillerEl

VoirDire"tospeakthetruth"

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
a. Preliminaryexamofprospectivewitnessesorjurorstodeterminetheircompetence.Also, oathadministeredforthispurpose JuryNOTE:28USC186364,18661867 o For800years,juriesconsistedof12personsusedtohavetobeunanimous. o Infederalcourttoday,civiljuriescouldconsistof6jurors,w/2alternates.Still havetobeunanimous o Inmoststates,legislaturesnowallownonunanimousjuries(6680%)

Thompsonv.AltheimerandGray

Facts:

Duringvoirdire,jurorwasbeingquestionedbyjudge.Shesaidshewas biasedb/cshewasabusinessownerandshefeltthatthiscouldcloud herjudgment. Newtrialb/cjudgefailedtoaskquestionsthatwouldhavegiven unequivocalassurancesthathedeemedcredible. Aperson'sbeliefsdon'tnecessarilyexcludethemfromjuryduty,but havetomakesurethattheycouldbefairwhenpresentedevidence.

Holding: Rationale:

D. JudgesControllingJuries,JuriesTrumpingJudges

"CrossSectional"SystemIssues: o Evenafterwomenwerenolongerexcluded,motherswereautomaticallyexempt o Jurieswereusuallyselectedsolelyfromtherollsofregisteredvotersuntil80s90s o Today,nonUScitizensareineligibleforjuryserviceandalljurorsmustbeliterate andfluentinEnglish. o Notunanimous,maynottryashard.Minorityviewsmaynotspeakup.More conscientiousiftheyrenderaunanimousverdict.

1. InstructionandComment Jurorsdon'tknowsubstantivelaw Rule51Judgeteachesthelawthroughjuryinstructions Partiesmustrequestinstructionsbeforeoratthecloseofevidence Mayonlybegivenafterthecloseofevidence,iftheycouldhavenot reasonablyhavebeenanticipatedtobeneeded. Mustinformpartiesofproposedinstructions,allowforobjectionsandcan instructjuryatanypointbeforedischarge Objectingparty,mustdosoonrecordandjustifyobjection Judgecancommentopenevidencebutcan'ttrespassintojury'sdecisionmaking space 2. ExcludingImproperInfluences Judgestelljurorstoonlyconsiderinfoscreenedthroughlawofevidence Judgesavoidoutcomesbyinstructingthejurorsnottodiscussthecasew/other andonlydecideonthebasisofevidencepresentedinthecourtroom 3. SizeandDecisionRules a. Consensusfulldiscussionofevidence 1. Rule48unanimousverdictsarerequiredunlessthepartiesagreeto acceptanonunanimous a. Courtcouldpullcertainjurorsbyrequestorownitsown b. Ifpollrevealslackofunanimitycouldasktodeliberatefurtheror ordernewtrial 4. JudgmentasamatterofLaw

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
a. Rule50(a)Ifajuryunanimouslyreachesaninsupportableconclusion,thanthe opposingpartymayaskjudgetograntjudgmentasamatteroflaw. b. Ifcourtgrantsmotionjurywon'treceivecase c. Ifdoesntgrantmotion28daysafterjudgmententrytorenewmotion 1. Preverdictdirectedverdict a. Judgesimplyentersjudgment b. Rule50(a)(2)MotionforJMLcanbesubmittedbeforethecaseis submittedtojury 2. PostverdictJudgmentnotwithstandingtheverdict a. Judgeentersajudgmentthatignoresthejuryverdict b. Rule50(b)MforJMLaftertheverdictmustbefiled28daysafter judgment PennsylvaniaRailroadv.Chamberlain Facts:

ThesonlywitnesswasonBainbridge,whosawthetwocarsinpassing andheardaloudcrash,butdidnotactuallyseeacollision.Itwasalso suggestedtheloudnoisecouldhavebeencausedbysomethingelseonthe property

JuryfoundinfavorofP,believedP'switness.DmovedforJNOV,Judgereversed.It wasthejudgethatgrantedaJNOV,becausethejuryisentitledtobelievethe witness. Casewhereprovenfactsgiveequalsupporttoeachof2inconsistentinference, judgmentasamatteroflawmustgoagainstthepartyuponwhomreststhe necessityofsustainingoneoftheseinferencesagainsttheother,beforeheis entitledtorecover. WherethereisaDirectconflictoftestimonyuponamatteroffact,theconflict mustberesolvedbythejury ReinstatedJNOVbecausethere"isnoconflictinthetestimonyastotheFACTS" Inacasewheretheprovenfactsgiveequalsupporttotwoinconsistentinferences, judgmentmustgoagainstthepartyuponwhomtheburdenofproofrests.

Procedural:

Holding:

Rule:

Lindv.SchenleyIndustries Facts: PwassalesmanagerforD(liquorCo)Dpromisedhimanincreaseinpayandshare ofcommissions,butbreachedpromise.Promisewasoral.PandP'ssecretary testifiedtopromises. JuryfoundforP.DmovedforJNOV,alternativelynewtrial.JudgegrantedJNOVand alt.Newtrial.Pappeals 1. Whatstandardthetrialcourtshouldapplyinsettingasideverdictsasbeing againsttheweightoftheevidence 2. HowtheTCshouldapplythatstandardtocaseathand 3. WhatstandardtheAppellantcourtshouldapplyinreviewingnewtrialrulings Trialjudgeabusedit'slegaldiscretionb/citsubstituteditsjudgmentforthatofthe juryonthisissue Inasituationwhereanewtrialisorderedbecauseevidencewasimproperly admitted,theproblemattrialwasaresultofsomethingoverwhichthejuryhadno controlandthecourtdoesnotusurptheprimefunctionofthejurybydirectinga

Procedural:

Issues:

Holding:

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
verdict. thetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretionbysubstitutingitsjudgmentforthatofthejury. Outcome Dissent Reversed,reinstatetheverdictinfavorofP Believedthattrialjudgeconsideredtheverdictagainsttheweightoftheevidence. SaidthattherewasavaguepromiseandPdidnotfollowuponthepromise, consideringtheraisewassolarge.Absenceofanymentionoftime.Judgecould reasonablyweighevidenceoffacts.

Dgrantsalt.motionfornewtrialbecausejury'sverdictwas Contrarytoweightofevidence Contrarytolaw Resultoferrorinadmissionofevidence d. StandardforaJMLnorationaljurycouldfindforthepartyopposingthemotion 1. Applyingthestandard a. Court'spowerlimitedcourtmayweighevidence,butitislimited. Substantialevidenceonbothsides,courtmustdenyJMLandlet juryhearthecase b. JuryDeterminesCredibilitysimilarlythejudgeshouldleave credibilitydeterminationstothejury c. Issuesw/intheprovinceofthejury:Negligencecourtismuchless likelytograntJMLonissueofwhetherapartyactedreasonablythan itisonotherissues.

1. NewTrial

Reidv.SaltLake(Cowthroughfencecase)ifthereisequalforcetotwosides,P

loses 1. JustificationsforNewTrials Rule59courtmaygrantnewtrial"foranyreasonforwhichanewtrial hasheretoforebeengrantedinanactionatlawinfederalcourt" JNOV Rule50 Focusonadequacyofevidence assumeprocessisOK Replacejury'sverdictw/judge's judgment Resultsinfinaljudgment IMMEDIATELYAPPEALABLE Newtrialorder Rule59 Lookeitheratevidentiaryadequacy(directed verdictstandard)orProcess(whathappenedat trial) Sendcasetonewjury Donotresultinfinaljudgmentifgranted UNAPPEALABLE(unlessconditionalaspartofa JNOVorder)

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
1. FlawedProcedures Processleadinguptoverdicthasbeenflawed Judgemayconcludelawyerhasmadeimpermissibleargumenttojury Judgeerredinadmittingpieceofevidence Gavewrongjuryinstructions Jurormisbehavedduringtrial Judgegetsachancetocorrecthimselftofixprocess Note:JudgecandothisevenifneitherpartysomovesRule59(d) b. 2.FlawedVerdicts Resultoftrialwasunjustifiable Juryeithermisunderstoodorignoredinstructions JudgmentfornewtrialVerdictisagainstthe"greatweightoftheevidence" Judgmentasamatteroflaw(JNOV)winneroftheverdicthadnosupportforat leastoneessentialelementofclaimordefense a. Rule50(b)allowspartiestoaskforbothJMLandnewtrialinasingle motion.WithNewtrialbeingalternative Rule50(c)JudgemustruleonJMLandNewTrial,evenifnewtrialis moot ConditionalNewTrials 1. NewTrialLimitedtoDamages a. Judgemustbeconvincedthatwhateverinfluencesledthejuryastrayon damagesdidnotinfectthejudgmentonliabilityaswell b. Usedwhenthedamagesareagainstthegreatweightoftheevidence 2. RemittiturandAdditur a. Insteadoforderingnewtrialondamages,Judgecouldreduceamountof damagesundercircumstances RemittiturjudgeordersnewtrialunlessthePagreestoacceptreducedamages Additurdamageincreasing(violates7thAmendment) StateLaw=somestatesallowbothwhilefederalcourtsdonotallowadditur TheReexaminationClauseandtheJuryasaBlackBox 7thAmendment Preventsajudgefromoverturningajuryverdictb/cshe,asajuror,would havevoteddifferentlythantheactualjurydid. Rule50DirectedJudgment/JudgmentasaMatterofLaw/JudgmentNotwithstandingtheVerdict (JNOV) DirectedJudgment Onlydecidedbythecourtbymotionofaparty Afterpartyagainstwhomyouaremovinghaspreventedtheircaseandbeforeithasbeen submittedtojury JudgmentasaMatterofLaw IfcourtdeniesmotionforDirectedJudgmentandjuryreturnsverdictagainstyou RequestJNOV,20daysafterjudgment Basisformotion: o Ifpartyfailstomeetburdenofproduction

Rule50 P'sverdict;Phassubmittedevidenceon causation,butweak DmovesforJNOV

Rule59 P'sverdict;Phassubmittedevidenceoncausation, butweak Dmovesfornewtrial

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.AVOIDINGADJUDICATION
Ruling:Deny Atendoftrial,Phaspresentedno evidenceofcausation:ifnoonefilesa motion,thenthejudgecanonlyorder Rule59. Ruling:Grantb/cagainstclearweightofthe evidence Judgeconcludesthatsheerredinadmitting evidenceoncausation.NewtrialRule59

Petersonv.Wilson
Facts: Judgespokew/jurors,theybasedtheirdecisiononthewrongfactors,disregarded courtsinstruction

ProceduralHistory: DrequestedJNOVoralt,newtrial.NewtrialinfavorofD.Pappeals. Holding: Yes,becausethejudgeshouldnothavespokentojuryabouttheirinternal deliberations.Jurortestimonycouldnotbeusedtoprovethatthejuryignoredthe judge'sinstructions FRERule606BJuror'saffidavitorevidenceofanystatementbyjurorconcerning matterwhichthejurorwouldbeprecludedfromtestifyingbereceivedforpurposesof [validatingaverdict]. Exceptionforjurortestimonyrelatingtoextraneousinfluences ViolatesTannerandRobles

Reasoning:

Rule50

Rule59

JMLPREVERDICT (DIRECTED VERDICT) noraonaljury couldndforthe opposingparty

NewTrialOrder Couldbegranted forawin 1.Procedure 2.Verdictagainst greatweightof evidence

Rule50(b)

RenewedJML POSTVERDICT (JNOV) Phaspresented noevidenceof causaon

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.RESPECTFORJUDGMENT

Appeals

AetnaCasualtyv.Cunningham
Issue:

Thosethatallowappealsonlybypartieswhohavesufferedanadversedecision Mayappealedbyapartytoasuitwhohasnotsettledorwon o Thelosingpartycouldnothavewonthecaseasawholecouldvewonsomething Thepartywillappealafterafinaljudgment

1. TermsofInscocontractpermittedrecover 2. w/oregardtopolicyterms,contractorhadcommittedfraudinapplyingforthe policyandAetna'slosswastraceabletothatfraud

Procedural DCruledforAetnaoncount1,not2.PandDappeals : Whichpartycouldraisewhichcontentionsoferroronappeal? Holding: Woncompensatorybutlostonfraud.Winningonfraudcountwouldnothave increasedthecompensatoryamount

Rationale: Ifreliefsoughtisthesame,undermultipleclaims,can'tappealiftheywouldgetthe sameresult

o o

AppellateReviewisResultOriented Lookatreliefsought

o o

B. WhoRaised(objectionyourhonor!!)theIssueBelow:OfWaiversand Sandbags o Apartymustpresenttothetrialcourtthecontentionsonwhichitwantsruling Failuretodosoresultsinawaiverofthecontentions Musthavemadetheobjectionduringtrial

Ex.Tenantsuesfordamagesunder1.lease2.HCV.TCawardsdamagesby acceptingtheory1Tcan'tappealb/cthereisnomorerelieftobesought! Crossappeal Mootnessonemaynotappealfromajudgmentwhencircumstanceshavechanged insuchawaythatreliefisnolongerpossible Orwhenpartiessettle Exceptionifitisanimportantquestion,thenthecourtcanuseittoansweran importantpolicyquestion Classactionmembersmayappeal,eventhoughtheyarenotnamed

SimilartoDueprocesshavetogivenoticetotrialcourttellthemtodo therightthing. Giveopportunitytoopposingpartyastowhythat'snottherightthing Rule46didawayw/needforexceptionsThepartyneedonly statetheactionthatitwantsthecourttotakeorobjectsto,along withthegrounds o Courtswanttoavoidparties"sandbagging"thetrialcourt Byvaguelyexpressinganobjectionthenproceedingthroughtherestofthetrial andhopingtowinonmeritsbutthinkingithasbankedanappellatereversalin caseofaloss Note:theonlyexceptionissubjectmatterjurisdiction

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.RESPECTFORJUDGMENT
o WhowasnotDeterredfromAppealing

TimingofAppealFinality

Changeinlawbtwentryinjudgmentandtimeofappealcansometimes useit o Plainerrorruleexceptiontogeneralrequirementthatanissuemustberaised inthetrialcourtasapredicatetohavingitaddressedonappeal Partymustconsistentlyshowanissueyouwanttoargue o Mostjurisdictionsallowonecivilappeal o Ifappealisfrivolous,singleordoublepayment

i. Finaljudgment ii. Practicallyfinaljudgment iii. InterlocutoryDecisions Under28USC1291appealslieonlyfromfinaldecisionofthedistrictcourts o TheFinalJudgmentRule o FinalDecisiononewhich"endsthelitigationonthemerits"andleaves nothingforthecourttodobutexecutethejudgment Finaljudgmentsfromdistrictcourt o Whichdecisionsarefinal? 28USC1291TheFinalJudgmentRulehas2functions: 1. Definesthemomentwhichappealisproper 2. Grantsjurisdictionfortheappellatecourtstohearthatappeal

LibertyMutualInsuranceCo.v.Wetzel

Facts:

Preceivednoneoftherelieftheyprayedforintheircomplaint.Pcomplainsthatthe Courtsorderdenyingthemotionforreconsiderationwasmerelyadeclaratory judgmentontheissueofliability. Pmovedforpartialsummaryjudgmenttoissueofliability,DistrictCourtruledthat therewasnomaterialfactindispute.Dfiledamotionforreconsiderationwhichwas deniedbytheDistrictCourt.DistrictCourtruledinfavorofPonissueofDsliability undertheActandDappealedtoCircuitCourtofAppeals.CircuitCourtheldthatit hadjurisdictionunder28U.S.C.1291andaffirmedthemeritsofthejudgmentof theDistrictCourt. TheSCgrantedcertiorarionTitleVII,thentheSCdidsomethingelsetheysaid,we don'thavejurisdiction! It'slikethisallneverhappened.Nooneeverarguedjurisdiction. 28USC1291therewasnofinaljudgment.DChadn'treleasedjudgmentb/cofthe courthadn'taddressedtheprayersforrelief. 28USC1292interlocutoryreview.PreliminaryInjunction RuleofLaw:Agrantofpartialsummaryjudgmentontheissueofliabilityaloneis interlocutoryandisonlyimmediatelyappealablepursuantto28U.S.C.1292(b). Interlocutory:Temporary,notfinal

Procedural Posture:

WhoraisedQof appellate jurisdiction? WhydidSC decidethatthere wasnoappellate jurisdiction under

AppellateJurisdictionandtheFinalJudgmentRule

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.RESPECTFORJUDGMENT
28USC1292(a)(1)InterlocutoryOrders Exceptiontofinaljudgmentrule.Allowsappealsfrominterlocutoryofdistrictcourts "granting,continuing,modifying,refusingordissolvinginjunctions,orrefusingtodissolve ormodifyinjunctions,exceptwhereadirectreviewmaybehadintheSupremeCourt;" Judgemustassertqoflaw,wherethereisasubstantialjudgment 28USC1292(b)Trialjudgemaycertifythatherorderinvolvesa"controllingquestionoflaw

astowhichthereissubstantialgroundfordifferenceofopinionandthatanimmediateappeal fromtheordermaymateriallyadvancetheultimateterminationofthelitigation"

DefiningtheMomentofJudgment

Rule54(b)acourtmaydirectentryoffinaljudgmenttooneormoreclaims,fewer thanallclaimsorparties,onlyifcourtfindsnojustreasonfordelay Mayrevisedecisionbeforecaseisover Rule58(b)(1)Therewasnogeneralverdictand58b1wouldnotapply Rule58Thereneedstobeaseparatedocumentwithjudicialjudgment 150dayruleafter150daysthereisanautomaticjudgment Clerksandjudgeswouldforgettofilethejudgmentandpartiescouldnever file.

Difficultyisthatjudgebelievesthatjudgecouldbesecondguessedbythe appellatecourt Rule4(a)(1)(A)timelynoticeofappealmustbefiledw/theclerkw/in30days (60fortheU.S.) Rule4(a)(6)empowerscourttoextendtimeforapartywhodidnotreceive noticeoftheentryjudgmentinqifnoprejudicetootherparties Rule4(a)(5)alsoallowstheDCtoextendthetimeforfilingtheappealupto30 daysshowingofexcusableneglectorgoodcause. 2. ExceptionstotheFinalJudgmentRule a. PracticalFinality CollateralOrderDoctrine Doctrineunderwhichanappealisallowedfromaninterlocutoryorder thatconclusivelydeterminesadisputedissuewheretheissueis completelyseparatefromthemeritsoftheactionandiseffectively unreviewableonappealfromafinaljudgment. Questionsofabsoluteorqualifiedimmunity Youcan'tsuemeb/cIhavearighttonotanswerinthiscourt toyou.. Discoveryordersarenotreviewableonappealexceptwhenyou meetthefinaljudgmentrule Admissibilityofevidencesamesituation Youhavetoshowitwouldhavemadeadifference Recusal Denyingmotionforclasscertification CohenTest 1. Conclusivelydeterminethedisputedquestion

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.RESPECTFORJUDGMENT
2. Resolveanimportantissuecompletelyseparatefromthemeritsof theaction 3. Effectivelyunreviewableuponappealfromfinaljudgment

4. Anorderiseffectivelyunreviewableonlyifitinvolvesanassertedright whichmustbevindicatedbeforetrial Ex.Bellv.Tsintolashearingtheissueafterfinaljudgmentwouldbe pointless

Injunctions PreliminaryInjunctions(notTROs)areappealable Receivershipsandadmiraltydecisions 28USC1292(a)(1)doesnotapplytoatemporaryrestrainingorder, althoughitdoestoapreliminaryinjunction Thisisbecausetheyareonly14daysseeRule65(b) Mandamuses

Writofmandamusordersapublicofficialtoperformanactrequiredby law

Riskymoveandhardstandardbecauseitisanabuseofdiscretion Highlyunlikelytobesuccessful Judgerefusedtorecuseherself Whatdidthecourtssayaboutthestandard

LauroLiness.r.l.v.Chasser Facts: Issue:

ScopeofReview LawandFact HarmlessError

Extraordinaryremedy[usedwhenjudgehasdeniedajurytrialorto preventthetransferofacaseoutofthecircuit] Traditionallyusedinthefederalcourtsonlytoconfineaninferiorcourtto alawfulexerciseofitsprescribedjurisdictionortocompelittoexercise itsauthoritywhenitisitsdutytodoso

Stolencruiseshipissueofwhetherticketprovidednoticeofforumwould benaples
Isaninterlocutoryorderofafederaldistrictcourtdenyinga'smotiontodismiss adamagesactiononthebasisofacontractualforumselectionclauseimmediately appealableunder28U.S.c.1291asacollateralfinalorder

Holding:

Inorderforaninterlocutoryordertobeappealableinaccordancewiththe collateralorderdoctrine,theordermust(1)conclusivelydeterminethe disputedquestion;(2)resolveanimportantissuecompletelyseparatefrom themeritsoftheaction;and(3)beeffectivelyunreviewableonappealfrom afinaljudgment.

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.RESPECTFORJUDGMENT
RESJUDICATA A.ClaimPreclusionistheclaimbarredbyaprioradjudication? 1.SameClaim?Isthecurrentclaimthesameasaclaimraisedintheprioraction? a.IdenticalClaimsaretheclaimsexactlyidentical? b.TransactionallyRelatedClaimsdotheclaimsariseoutofthesametransactionor seriesofconnectedtransactions? 2.SameParties?Doesthecurrentactioninvolvethesamepartiesthatwerepartytoand adversariesintheoriginalaction?Sameclaimantandsamedefendant? a.IdenticalPartiesarethepartiesinbothactionsidentical? b.PartiesinPrivityifapartyinthecurrentactionwasnotapartytotheoriginal action,istherearelationshipbetweenthatpartyandapartyintheoriginalactionthat warrantstreatingthenonpartytotheinitialactionasifitwereaparty? 3.FinalJudgment?Wastheprioractionconcludedbyafinaljudgmentonthemerits? a.Judgmentsforifthepriorcasewasresolvedinfavorofthe,itisconsidereda finaljudgmentonthemerits. b.Judgmentsforifthecasewasresolvedinfavorofthe,theresolutionisnot treatedasafinaljudgmentonthemeritsifitwasdismissedforlackofjurisdiction, impropervenue,orfailuretojoinapartyunderRule19.Otherwise,aresolutionfora isconsideredafinaljudgmentonthemeritsunlessotherwiseindicated.

Frierv.Vandalia
Pfiledactionforreplevin,lost,thentriedtosueinfederalcourtforDueProcess. Courtsaidnob/cClaimPreclusion

Martinov.McDonaldsSystem,Inc.ConsistencyinClaimPreclusiononSameIssue
Pshouldhavefiledacompulsoryclaimnowitsclaimpreclusion B.IssuePreclusionhasanissuealreadybeenconclusivelyresolvedbetweenthepartiesinaprior action? 1.SameParties?Doesthecurrentactioninvolvethesamepartiesthatwerepartiestoand adversariesintheoriginalaction? a.SeePartA.2aboveforthestepsinthisanalysis. 2.SameIssue?Istheissueraisedintheprioractionidenticalinallrespectstotheissueraisedin thecurrentaction? 3.ActuallyLitigatedandDetermined?Wastheissueactuallylitigatedanddeterminedinthe prioraction,meaningtheissuewasraisedandarguedbytheparties? 4.NecessarytotheJudgment?Wasresolutionoftheissueinquestionnecessarytothe judgmentreachedinthecase? a.OutcomeDeterminativewouldadifferentdecisionregardingtheissuehave affectedtheoutcomeofthecase?

CIVILPROCEDURE XII.RESPECTFORJUDGMENT
b.MultipleGroundsisitunclearonwhichofmultiplegroundsforreliefajudgmentsrelies? SearleBrothersv.Searle Brothersdidnthaveanopptytointerveneintheirparentsdivorcetohaveclaimforthehouse Richardsv.JeffersonCounty FollowedBedingfieldsamechallengeagainstcountryforpropertytax Noclaimpreclusioneachpersonhastheirdayincourt Gargallov.MerrillLynch,Pierce,Fenner&Smith Mrtg.Broker OhioCourtsdismissalofPsclaimnopreclusiveeffectb/cstatedidnthaveFed.Qjurisdiction RuleofLaw:Afederalcourtmaynotgiveclaimpreclusiveeffecttoapriorfinaljudgmentbyastate courtuponacauseofactionoverwhichthestatecourthadnosubjectmatterjurisdiction. ParklaneHosieryCo.v.Shore PandSECsuedcompanyprotectslitigantsfromrelitigatinganidenticalissue Nonmutualpartiesusedbypartysomeonewhowasnotpartyincase1 StateFarmFire&CasualtyCo.v.CenturyHomeComponents Multipleplaintiffsdifferentoutcomes.Isthereaclaimpreclusion? RuleofLaw:Whereinconsistentdeterminationsexistonthematterinissue,theapplicationofcollateral estoppelwouldmostlikelybeunjust. Goals:

Efficiency
Ifweletpeoplechopclaimsup,its unfairtoDandotherlitswaitingtheir turn BarsecondClaimif: Phadchancetoraiseoppty principle Relatedtofirstclaim

Consistency Ifweletpeoplebringclaimsthatundermine integrityoffirstjudgment,itsbothwastefuland athreattoadjudication(inconsistency) BarsecondClaimif: ItwouldhavebeenaDef.tofirstclaim Itunderminesintegrityoffirstjudgment o Isthatafancywordforsayingwe don'twantcourtstolookbad

CIVILPROCEDURE XIII.PERSONALJURISDICTION
Jurisdic tion

PersonalJurisdiction abilityofacourthavingsubject matterjurisdictiontoexercise poweroveraparticulardefendant oritemofproperty. InPersonam InRem QuasiInRem

SubjectMatterJurisdiction involvesthecourt'spower overaparticulartypeofcase.

forumhaspower overtheperson ofaparticular defendant.

Courtcan courthaspowertodetermine adjudicatew/ whether particularindividuals respecttoa ownspecificpropertywithin particularitemof thecourt'scontrol. property

Persons

Corporations

B. ConstitutionalLimitsinLitigation
1. TheIdeaofJurisdiction
o

JurisdictionThePowertodeclarethelaw JudicialJurisdiction Powerofacourttorenderajudgmentthatothercourtsandgovernment agencieswillrecognizeandenforce.

Jurisdictionandtheconstitution
setfootastate cases

o PersonalJurisdiction Thepowerofacourttorenderjudgmentbindingonsomeonewhohasnever o SubjectMatterJurisdiction Powerofafederal,asopposedtostatecourtstodecideoncertainkindsof

o ArticleIII Authorizestheestablishmentofthesystemoffederalcourts Section2setsthelimitsoffederaljudicialauthority Congresscanlimitthescopeoffederaljudicialauthoritymorenarrowlythan

Courtmusthavebothtorenderavalidjudgment

doestheconstitution. Limitonpoweroffederalcourtstohearcertainkindsofcases

CIVILPROCEDURE XIII.PERSONALJURISDICTION
SubjectMatterjurisdiction o ArticleIV,Section1(FullFaithandCredit) Requiresthat"FullFaithandCreditbegivenineachStatetojudicialpleadingsof everyotherstate Onestaterecognizeandenforcejudgmentsofanotherstate Note:FullFaithandCreditwillonlyapplyifthecourthadjurisdictiontodoso. DealswithDueProcessandSubjectMatterJurisdiction o FourteenthAmendment,Section1(DueProcessClause) NoStateshalldepriveanypersonoflife,libertyorpropertyw/odueprocessof Law" Amendments5and14limitonstateauthoritytohearcasesinvolvingcertains Personaljurisdiction
o o Constitutionalsodictateswhichsetoflawsacourtmustapplytoadispute

TheConstitutionandChoiceofLaw

ArticleVI(SupremacyClause)providesthattheConstitutionandfederal laws"shallbethesupremeLawoftheLandandjudgesineverystateshall beboundthereby,anyThingintheConstitutionorLawsofanyStateto theContrarynotwithstanding" Inabsenceofacontrollingfederalstatute,thefederalcourtsystemisrequired torespectboththestatutoryandcommonlawrulesoftheseveralstates

PersonalJurisdiction
PoweroverDorovertheirproperty Pennoyerv.Neff(1877)statehaspoweroverpeopleandthingsinthestate
TraditionalBasis 1. Dwasservedw/processintheforum(presence)Generaljurisdiction 2. Dsagentisservedw/processinthestate 3. Disdomiciledinthestatecanbesuedinthatstate 4. Dconsenttojurisdictioncanwaiveconstitutionalprotection

"itfollowsfromtheviewsexpressedthatthepersonaljudgmentrecoveredin OregonagainstP,thenanonresidentofthestatedidnotauthorizeasaleofthe propertyincontroversy" Pennoyerstandsforpropositionthatundercertainconditionsjudgmentsentered w/ojurisdictionisnotentitledtoFullFaithandCredit o Judgmentwassubjecttocollateralattack o Jurisdictioncanbechallengedunderdueprocess Proceduraldueprocess NeffhadconsentedtoOregon'sjurisdictioninhiscontractw/Mitchell Neffhadbeenservedw/processinthestate c. Neff'spropertyhadbeenattachedbeforethelawsuit i. Ifyouservetheland,thenyouservethelandowner

CIVILPROCEDURE XIII.PERSONALJURISDICTION
d. Oregonhadpassedastatuteprovisionofgoodsorservicesw/inOregon appointtheSec.ofStateastheiragentsforserviceofprocessforclaims arisingoutofthosegoodsorservices DFNotes: Physicalpresence(personorproperty)isnecessaryandsufficient Courtsmayenterbindingjudgmentagainstanonresidentifheisservedw/process whileinthestateORifhehaspropertyw/inthestateANDifthatpropertyisattached beforelitigationbegins Servew/instate,attachproperty. ReinforcedbyBurnam LimitedbyShaffer

RulesEstablishedinPennoyer A. Power a. Overpersonsandcorporations b. OverProperty A&BShoe,ShafferandBurnham B. Consent C. Notice Inaccordancewithdueprocessrequirements,jurisdictionisonlyproperinasuitin personamifthereceivesserviceofprocesswithinthestate(oftheclaim),orifthe voluntarilyappearsincourt. ConstitutionalIssues a. DueProcessrestrictsthepowerofstategov'ts,theboundariesofpersonal jurisdictionproclaimedbytheSCbindstatecourts b. FullFaithandCreditlinksittoJurisdiction. 1. DoctrineofCollateralAttack:ADmayundersomecircumstancesattack inasecondcollaterallawsuit.Ajudgmentrenderedw/ojurisdiction

MinimumContacts InternationalShoeCo.v.Washington(AfterWWII)
Procedural:Dmadeaspecialappearancetosetasideorderandstatethattherewasnopersonal jurisdiction. Rationale:acorporationthatchoosestoconductactivityw/inastateimplicitlyacceptsa reciprocaldutytoanswerforitsinstateactivitiesinthelocalcourts. Dwhodeliberatelychoosestotakeadvantageofthe"benefitsandprotectionsofthelaws"ofa statewillnotbeheardtocry"foul"whenthatstateholdshertoaccountinitscourtforherin stateacts.

CIVILPROCEDURE XIII.PERSONALJURISDICTION
LightContacts HeavyContacts Howheavyisheavyenoughforgeneraljurisdiction Individualspermanentresidents Corporationsplaceofbusiness Minimumcontactsreasonabletohavepersonaljurisdiction Qualityandnature Continuous/systematic LawsuitaresultofD'scontactsinthestate BurdenonD

SpecificJurisdiction

***MagicwordsfromInternationalShoe:"themusthavesuchminimumcontactswiththe forumsothatexerciseofjurisdictiondoesnotoffendtraditionalnotionsoffairplayand substantialjustice." 1. Flexibleexpandsjurisdiction 2. Clearthatyoucanservethattotheoutsideofthejurisdiction 3. 2parts: a. ContactthisisALWAYSFIRST b. Fairness 4. DoesnotoverrulePennoyer TraditionalbasisfromPennoyerisstillgood

McGeev.InternationalLifeInsuranceCo.
TexasInsurancecompanysoldonecontracttoCalifornia,breachedthatonecontract 1. StressedthatDsolicitedthecontractfromCalifornia 2. Stressedtheforumstate'sinterestinprovidingaforumforitscitizens 3. 3.Relatednessthep'sclaimarosefromtheD'scontactwiththeforum DFNotes: Singlebusinesstransactionisenough Actgivesrisetoclaim,deliberatelydirectedtowardthestate SingleactisOKifdeliberate

PurposefulAvailment Hansonv.DencklaCourtsaidnojurisdiction

Facts:wealthywomanDelawarebank.MovestoFlorida. Issue:DidFloridahavejurisdictionovertheDelawarebank? Holding:No,becausetheDhadnopurposefulavailmentofFlorida. Dmustreachoutoftheforum.Delawarebankdidnotdothis.Ms.Dencklamoved there.DifferentfromMcGee,DelawarebankneverreachedouttoFlorida. NojurisdictionifDscontactsarenegligibleandnondeliberateandclaimdoesn'tarise fromthecontacts Casual,isolated,unilateralconductisnotenough

CIVILPROCEDURE XIII.PERSONALJURISDICTION MustapplyShoetoInRemandQuasiInRem Shafferv.Heitner

Facts:DelawareShareholders.Suingdirectorsofcorp.attachessharestothecomplaint QuasiInRem Fairplayandsubstantialjustice
"Judicialjurisdictionovertheinterestsofpersonisinathing" Ifthedisputeisoverthepropertyitself,thevenuewouldbethestatethatitislocatedin. PropertycouldbecompletelyunrelatedtotheP'scauseofaction Benefitargumentinfavorofassessingassertionsofjurisdictionbyasinglestandard PurposeofDelawaresequesteringprocedureistocompeltheDtoenterpersonalappearance Adjudicateclaimsoverwhichthestatewouldnothavejurisdictionifshoeappliedisthat

Wrongdoer"shouldnotbeabletoavoidpaymentofhisobligationsbytheexpedientof removinghisassetstoaplacewhereheisnotsubjecttoaninpersonamsuit"
Physicalpresenceofpropertyaloneisnolongersufficient NarrowedPennoyeronproperty

Howdoyouchallengeacasebyarguingthatthecourtdoesn'thavepersonaljurisdiction?

a. DoNothing o Waitfordefaultjudgment o Whentheytrytocollect,refutethattherewasnopersonaljurisdictionintheoriginal claim b. FileaPreTrialMotion 1. Rules12(b),(h)(g) Note:YOUMUSTRAISELACKOFJURISDICTIONFIRST!!

PreAnswerMotion Rule12(b)(2)raisepersonaljurisdictioninapreanswermotionoranswer (responsivepleading) Shouldbepackagedtogether Rule12(g)Motionsmaybejoined;apartymaynotmakesuccessivemotions

raisingnewdefensesorsuccessivemotionsraisingnewdefensesorobjections availablebutomittedfrompriormotions(claimpreclusion) Rule12(h)personaljurisdictioniswaivedifnotraisedproperly c. SpecialAppearance 1. Doesn'tconstituteconsent,justlettingDobjecttojurisdictionw/oobjecting beingthebasisforjurisdiction

a. TheModernConstitutionalFormulationofPower
GeneralJurisdiction
InPersonamWhentheforumhaspowerovertheparticular Commonproblemiscorporations Millikenv.Meyer2partnersinoilwellsuedeachother.Casein Colorado,guylivedinWyoming.Collateralsuitsayingthatcourt lackedpersonaljurisdiction.Courtsaiditdidn'tb/cTherewasan appropriate"SubstitutedService"(Serviceotherthanpersonal serviceinforumstate) InRempowercourthasoveraproperty

SpecificJurisdiction

CIVILPROCEDURE XIII.PERSONALJURISDICTION 2. AbsorbingInRemJurisdiction

o Shoeinvolvedacorporatedidn'tdiscussapplicabilitytoindividuals o QuasiInRemjurisdictioncreateddoctrinalpossibilities. Harrisv.Balk HowedBmoney,BowedEmoney Statecouldacquirejurisdictionoverpersonswheneverdebtorswere

presentinthatstateby"attaching"thedebts Creditorsliableinanystatewheretheirdebtorsstepfoot ExtendedPennoyer

ConstitutionalLimitsonInPersonamJurisdiction
o SufficientContactswiththeForum:ContactandFairness TraditionalRule:PhysicalPower

1. Contact PurposefulAvailment(McGee) "StreamofCommerce"Cases(Asahi) InternetCases(Pavlovich) Foreseeability(WWVW) 2. Fairness RelatednessofClaimtoContact ClaimArisingfromActivityintheState SystematicandContinuousActivityintheState Convenience ForumState'sInterestinadjudicatingthedispute Psinterestinobtainingconvenientandeffectiverelief InterstateJudicialsystemsinterestinobtainingthemostefficientresolution Sharedinterestofstatesfurtheringsubstantivesocialpolicies 3. Notice TraditionalMethodsofPersonalServiceSatisfyDueProcessNotice Requirements RequirementthatAgentNotify RequirementsforCasesInvolvingMultiplePartiesorUnknownParties KnowledgethatNoticebyMailWasNotReceived

StatutoryLimitsonInPersonamJurisdiction SpecificJurisdiction:TheModernCases
OneneedspracticeinapplyingtheconceptsofInternationalShoeanditstwostrandsspecific andgeneraljurisdiction. .Oklahomahadjurisdictionovermanufacturerandimporter. 1. Audi 2. VWofAmerica 3. WWV 4. Seaway DidOKhavejurisdictionovertheregionaldistributor(WWV)?Itonlydidbusiness inNY,CNandNJ.

WorldWideVolkswagenCorp.v.Woodson
Facts:

Issue:

CIVILPROCEDURE XIII.PERSONALJURISDICTION
Didtheyhavejur.OverSeawaymotors? Holding: NO,b/cthereisnopurposefulavailment. D'sdidnotreachouttoOK.Thecargottherethroughaunilateralthirdparty. Foreseeabilityisrelevant: Notforeseeablethatproductwouldgetthere. "TheD'sconductandconnectionwiththeforumstatearesuchthathe shouldreasonablyanticipatebeinghauledintocourtthere" Astatecourtmayexercisepersonaljurisdictionoveranonresidentsolongas thereexists"minimumcontacts"betweentheandthatforumstate Minimumcontactsandforeseeabilityaren'tnecessarilythesamething. MereforeseeabilitythattheproductcouldendinOK,isinsufficient. Doesn'tnecessarilymeanthatyoushouldbesubjecttopersonaljurisdiction towherethatcarmaydrive. Purpose: ProtectstheDagainsttheburdensoflitigatinginadistantorinconvenient forumdegreeofpredictability a. Intermsof"reasonableness"or"fairness"seefairnessabove ActstoensurethattheStatesdonotreachoutbeyondthelimitsimposed onthembytheirstatusascoequalsovereignsinafederalsystem Brennancouldreasonablybehailedintocourt

Rationale:

Dissent

AsahiMetalIndustryCo.v.SuperiorCourt
Facts: Holding: Rationale: ThecourtdeniedtomotionandheldthatAsahididbusinessonaninternationalscaleand founditreasonablethattheydefendclaimsofdefectinproductonaninternationalscale. Reversed,nojurisdiction.NOCLEARLAW!44SPLIT Brennan4:(PartIIB)StreamofCommerce ItisacontactifIputtheproductinthestream,andIreasonablyanticipatethatitwill gettootherstates. Lackofpurposefulavailmentintheforumstate DPCforbidsastatefromexercisingjurisdictionundercircumstancesthatwould offendtraditionalnotionsoffairplayandsubstantialjusticeShoe.Justicesapplythe 4factortestfromWWV. O'Connor4:(PartIIA)StreamofCommercePLUSIntentorpurpose YouneedwhatBrennansaidPLUStheintentorpurposetoserveotherstates. o Ex.D'sactionscanindicateanintentorpurposetoservethemarketsuchas advertisingorcustomerserviceinthoseotherstates. The"substantialconnection"betweentheDandtheforumStatenecessaryfora findingofminimumcontactsmustcomeaboutbyanactionofthepurposefully directedtowardtheforumstate.Theplacementofaproductintothestreamof commerceisnotanactoftheDpurposefullydirectedtowardtheforumstate. Stevens Minimumcontactsandpersonaljurisdictionsisnotnecessarilytied. Fairplayandsubstantialjustice.

Ruleof Law:

CIVILPROCEDURE XIII.PERSONALJURISDICTION

BurgerKingCorpv.Rudzewicz1985
Facts: Rationale: BurgerKingwantstosuelittleguysfromMichiganaftertheirfranchise agreementbegantodeteriorate. InternationalShoehas2parts: Contactmusthavearelevantcontactbeforefairnessbecomesrelevant purposefullyavaileditselfoftheprivilegeofconducting activitieswithintheforumstate. Madeasubstantialconnectionwiththestate c. ContractsaidagreementwouldbefiledinFlorida. FairnesstheburdenisontheDtoshowthatthisforumis unconstitutional. a. Dmustshowthatforumissogravelydifficultandinconvenientthat youareataseveredisadvantageinlitigation. i. Relevantwealthofthepartiesisirrelevant DPC:Foreseeability(WWV)thattheD'sconductandconnectionw/theforum Statearesuchthatheshouldreasonablyanticipatebeinghauledintocourt there. Kscreateminimumcontactsasreq.byshoeforexerciseforPJonnonresident

Holding:

Generalv.SpecificInPersonamJurisdiction Perkins Helicopteros Rule:ThereisgeneralInP,ifDhascontinuous,systematictiestotheforum.

Pavlovichv.SuperiorCourt
Facts:
Dhasinternetcompany,suedbyCaliforniacompany.Doesn'thaveanybusinessor contactsinCalifornia.

Rationale: AcourtmayexercisespecificjurisdictionoveranonresidentDonlyif:

theDhaspurposefullyavailedhimselfoftheforumbenefits ThecontroversyisrelatedtoorarisesoutoftheD'scontactswiththeforum Theassertionofpersonaljurisdictionwouldcomportwith"fairplayand substantialjustice:

Holding:

Nojurisdiction.CSScansuebutinIndianaorTexas,notCalifornia.Appliedasliding scaledirectlyenteringcontract,oriftheywerejustpostinginformationonthe internet. Insufficientknowledge. Asknowledgealone(thathistortuousconductmayharmindustriescenteredin theforumState)isinsufficienttoestablishexpressaimingattheforumstateas requiredbytheeffectstest. Sameeffectofaplacingaproductintothestreamofcommercewithoutany furtheraction.Reversedandremanded. ExpressAimingTestWheretheD'stortiousactionsexpresslyaimedattheforum state?DoesheknowtheeffectsthataPwilllikelysuffer?

Ruleof Law:

CIVILPROCEDURE XIII.PERSONALJURISDICTION
GeneralPersonalJurisdiction:CircumstancesunderwhichDwillbesubjecttojurisdictioneventhose w/ojurisdictioninforumstate Corpsstateofincorporation,principlebusiness Continuousandsystematiccontacts

Burnhamv.SuperiorCourtinstateservicerule.
Facts: Issue: Holding: GuycametoCaliforniatovisitchildren,wasservedinCaliforthosedays DoesCalihavegeneraljurisdiction?IstheserviceinCalienoughaccordingto Pennoyer?OrdowealsohavetoapplyInt'lShoe? Courtsplit441. Scalia Presencewhenservedisenough.Pennoyerlives!! HistoricalPedigreewehavealwaysdoneitthatwayandShafferdidn't changethewaywethinkaboutthis. ShaffercompelsconclusionthatstatelacksPJoverindiv.Unlesslitarisesout ofactivitiesinthestate Brennan YoumustapplyInt'lShoetoeverycase.Traditionalbasisisirrelevant. Everythingwassweptawayw/Int'lshoe. Shafferchangedthewaywethinkaboutthis,buttherearecontactsandit's fair Stevens ItsaneasycasebutIwon'ttellyouwhy Bothagreethat:Californiahadgeneraljurisdiction Yes.Itisafirmlyestablishedprinciplethatthecourtsofastatehavejurisdictionover nonresidentswhoarephysicallypresentinthestate..Consistentandsystematic contactsbetweenthenonresidentandtheforumarenotrequiredwhen jurisdictionisestablishedbasedonphysicalpresence.Jurisdictionbasedonphysical presencealoneconstitutesdueprocess.Notallassertionsofstatecourtjurisdiction havetobeevaluatedaccordingtotheminimumcontactsstandard.Affirmed. Jurisdictionbasedonphysicalpresencealoneconstitutesdueprocess.

Rule:

Consentasasubstituteforpower Pennoyerpowerorconsentcouldestablishjurisdiction Dmayeitherattheoutsetofthelawsuitconsenttojurisdicitoninaforum

BeforeInternationalShoe,thecasesspeakingofconsentreferredtoconsentimpliedfrom presenceorbywhatmodernjurisdictionalanalysisreferredtoascontacts. Suchcontactscanprovideabasisforjurisdiction,butarenotconsent. Duetothis,realconsentmaybereferredtoasaspecificagreementtosubmittojurisdiction.

CarnivalCruisev.Shute.consenttojurisdiction

Background:sboughtcruiseticketsthroughaWashingtontravelagent.Theticketssaidthatall mattersarisingoutofthecontractshouldbelitigatedsolelyinaFloridacourt.Concedednoticeof

CIVILPROCEDURE XIII.PERSONALJURISDICTION
theforumselectionclause,butarguedthattheclausewasunenforceablebecauseitwasnotthe productofnegotiation. RuleofLaw:Aforumselectionclausemayconferjurisdictionifnotfundamentallyunfair. Rationale:.ThesprincipalplaceofbusinessisinFL.Thereisnounfairnessinenforcingtheclause becausenoticeandfairnesswouldbejustifiablyserved. Carnivalhadgoodfaith. TheConstitutionalRequirementofNotice(p.140)

PersonalJurisdictionsofar:

Inordertoexercisejurisdictionovera,aforumstatemusthaveeither Power(flowingfromthekindofrelationshipsdiscussedinthe contactscases)orthesConsent(comingfromwitheraprelitigation agreement[Carnival]orbywaiver[whenappears,butfailsto challengejurisdiction].)

As,Pennoyersawit,itwasreasonabletoassumepeoplekeptaneyeontheir property,andthereforeastatecouldpresumethattheseizureofproperty wouldalsoconstitutenotice.

Notice Mullanev.CentralHanoverBank&TrustCo.

PublishednoticetobeneficiariesinaNewspaper ThiscasewasnotaboutinRemjurisdiction Pennoyersaysifyougotstoppedsomewhere,weachievesomethingjustbydoingit. InMullane,therepresentativeofthebeneficiariesraisedtwochallenges Challenge

Response

Nojurisdictionoveroutofstate beneficiaries Evenifstatehaspower,failureto notifybeneficiariesviolatesdue process

Court'sresponsetochallengetoNY's poweroveroutofstatebeneficiaries? Itisout! Noticetothebeneficiarieswas insufficient

Rule4Summons Ifthosestatutesandrulesareconstitutionalfaciallyandasappliedtothecaseathand,then noticeisadequate Inmanyinstancesitwillbeclearthatnoticeisadequate NotesDF: 1. Dmustbenoticedbymostpracticalmeansavailable. 2. Reasonablycalculatedtoreachtheinterestedparties. 3. Ifyouhaveaddressesjustmailittothem 4. Rule4(K)noticeestablishesjurisdiction Frameworkforexam: 1. Flagwhetheroneofthetraditionalbasisapplies.(Pennoyer) 2. LetprofessorknowyouknowaboutBurnham.(Int'lShoe) 1. MusthavearelevantcontactbtwDandforum. 1. PurposefulavailmentfocusesonD'sintentionality(McGee)

CIVILPROCEDURE XIII.PERSONALJURISDICTION
Ddirectshisactivitiestowardstheforumsothatheshouldexpecttobe subjecttothecourt'sjurisdiction. 2. MustmakeitforeseeablethatDcouldgetsuedinthatforum. 0. Fairness 1. Relatedness a. DoestheP'sclaimarisefromtheD'scontactwiththeforum? i.Ifyes,wecanfindjurisdictionMcGee ii.Ifno,thenwecanonlysueifwehavegeneraljurisdiction.IfDhas continuous,systematictiesw/theforum. 2. Theburdenisonthetoshowthatitissogravelyinconvenientthatsheisata severedisadvantage(BurgerKing) 1. InconvenienceforDandwitness 2. State'sinterest(doesthestatehaveaninterest)McGee. 3. TheP'sinterestinlitigatingathome a. MaybethePisinjured 4. Interestinefficiency 5. InterstateInterestinsharedsubstantivepolicies

CIVILPROCEDURE IXV.SUBJECTMATTERJURISDICTION

A. TheIdeaandtheStructureofSubjectMatterJurisdiction
Courtmusthave: a. PersonalJurisdiction b. SubjectMatterJurisdictionsortingmattersbetweenfederalandstatecourts. c. Venue ArticleIII Rule8(a)requiringthateveryfederalcomplainttobeginwitha"shortandplain statementofthegroundsforthecourt'sjurisdiction" 1. Looksto: a. Constitution b. Statutesconferringjurisdiction c. Caselawinterpretingboth 28U.S.C.1331,1332 1. Grantsfederalcourtsjurisdictionovercasesthatariseunderfederallaw. a. However,stateshavethisjurisdictiontoo,thisisconcurrentjurisdiction b. Questionsofdiversity 2. Lawyerscanhavemundaneandstrategicreasonsforchoosingone jurisdictionoveranother 3. Districtcourtshaveoriginaljurisdiction 28U.S.C.1333 Thedistrictcourtsshallhaveoriginaljurisdiction,exclusiveofthecourtsofthe States,of: 1. Anycivilcaseofadmiraltyormaritimejurisdiction,savingtosuitorsin allcasesallotherremediestowhichtheyareotherwiseentitled. 2. AnyprizebroughtintotheU.S.andallproceedingsforthe condemnationofproperty Doctrine Constitutional Source StatutorySource PersonalJurisdiction DueProcessClause (14thAmendment) StateandFederalLongarmstatutes Rule4(k)(1)(A) Limitspowerofstateandfederal courtsinanygivenstateovercases involvingparticulars StateCourts: CourtsofGeneralJurisdiction Rule12(b)(2)waive FederalsubjectmatterJurisdiction ArticleIII Federaljurisdictionalstatutes (enablingstatutes) 28U.S.C.1331,1332 Limitspoweroffederalcourtsto certainkindsofcases(those involvingfederalclaims,ordiverse parties) FederalCourts: CourtsofLimitedJurisdiction Rule12(b)(1) Rule12(b)(6) Rule12(h)(3)MUSTBEDISMISSED

Effect

Courts Rules

FederalQuestionJurisdiction
a. JudiciaryAct

CIVILPROCEDURE IXV.SUBJECTMATTERJURISDICTION
ExpandthefederaljudiciarybeyondtheSupremeCourt 1. Created"inferior"federalcourts 2. Grantedjurisdictionsofdiversityandadmiralty 3. absenceofanygeneralfederalquestionjurisdictions. WhatDoes"ArisingUnder"Mean? ArticleIII Thejudicialpowershallextendtoall Casesarisingunderthisconstitution,the lawoftheunitedstatesandtreaties made VeryBroad OnlyguaranteedinAppellate Jurisdiction 28USC1331year1875 Thedistrictcourtsshallhaveoriginaljurisdiction overallcivilactionsarisingunderthe constitution,lawsortreatiesoftheUnited States VeryNarrow MostSection1331jurisdictionisveryclear becausethefilessuitallegingviolationofa federallaw. P'sclaimonitsface,arisesunderafederal causeofaction i.

LouisvilleNashvilleRRv.Mottley(1908)
Facts:FederalLawsayscannotgiveawayfreepasses.MottleyssuetheRR.Incomplainttheysay 1.Youareb/k 2.NewFederalStatutedoesntapplytous Notenforcingafederalright Issues: DFNotes: Can'tanticipateanallegedfederalquestioninD'sanswer Orig.complaintmusthaveafederalquestion o Partofawellpleadedcomplaint IfPdoesn'tallegeafederalquestion

"Wellpleadedcomplaint"rule
a. b.

Thecomplainthasto"ariseunder"federallaw muststateinthecomplaint,"SuingunderFederalactandFed.Courthasjurisdictionunder 28U.S.C.1331becauseitarisesunderfederallaw" i. IsthePenforcingaFederalRight? i. Hastoshowuponthecauseofaction ii. Comesfromthestatute iii. Causesyoutonarrowthejurisdictionwhichyoumightbeentitledto iv. Disadvantages: 1. EliminatescaseslikeMottleywheretheissuewasafederaldefenseinsteadof partoftheP'sclaim 2. Rulemaymakelesssensenowthanwhenitwasframed.

NOTE:CHALLENGINGFEDERALSUBJECTMATTERJUSIDICTION
Howdoyoudismissacaseforlackoffederalsubjectmatterjurisdiction? i. Rule12(b)(1)assertingtheabsenceoffederalsubjectmatter.

CIVILPROCEDURE IXV.SUBJECTMATTERJURISDICTION
Onlymethodindiversitycases NoPreclusion Rule12(b)(6)motiontodismissthesubstantiveclaim 1. Ifthereisnojurisdiction,thereisnoclaim 2. Youshouldchoose12(b)(6)becauseitprecludestheclaimfrombeingraised again(withprejudice) Rule41(b) (b)InvoluntaryDismissal;Effect. Ifthefailstoprosecuteortocomplywiththeserulesoracourtorder,amaymove todismisstheactionoranyclaimagainstit.Unlessthedismissalorderstatesotherwise, adismissalunderthissubdivision(b)andanydismissalnotunderthisruleexceptone forlackofjurisdiction,impropervenue,orfailuretojoinapartyunderRule19 operatesasanadjudicationonthemerits. MotionforDismissalbasedonlackofjurisdictionnotadjudicationonthemerits

ii.

iii.

DiversityJurisdiction
a. b. FederalDiversityofCitizenshipJurisdiction 1. ArticleIII 2. Betweencontroversiesbetweencitizensofdifferentstates AbolitionofDiversityofCitizenshipJurisdiction 1. Districtcourtshaveoriginaljurisdictioninfederalquestioncases ArticleIII
Thejudicialpowershallextendtoall cases,inlawandequity,arisingunderthis Constitution,thelawsoftheUnited States,andtreatiesmade,orwhichshall bemade,undertheirauthority;toall casesaffectingambassadors,otherpublic ministersandconsuls;toallcasesof admiraltyandmaritimejurisdiction;to controversiestowhichtheUnitedStates shallbeaparty;tocontroversies betweentwoormorestates;betweena stateandcitizensofanotherstate; betweencitizensofdifferentstates; betweencitizensofthesamestate claiminglandsundergrantsofdifferent states,andbetweenastate,orthe citizensthereof,andforeignstates, citizensorsubjects.

28USC1332 DiversitysuitmustinvolvePsandDswho are"citizensofdifferentstates"or"citizensor subjectsofaforeignstate" Thedistrictcourtsshallhaveoriginal jurisdictionofcivilactionswhereamountis greaterthan$75K. o Citizensofdiffstates o Citizensofastateandcitizensor subjectsofforeignstate o Citizensofdiffstatesandinwhich citizensorsubjectsofaforeignstateare additionalparties;and o aforeignstate,definedin section1603(a)ofthistitle,asand citizensofaStateorofdifferentStates.

Mustlookandseewherepersonisdomiciled andwhereacompanyisincorporatedandit's principleplaceofbusiness

Note:casesthatmeettherequirementsof1332maybelitigatedinstateorfederalcourt Phasthediscretiontochoose. Diversitymustoccuratthecommencementoftheaction PmustestablishdiversityinthecomplaintpursuanttoRule8(a)(1)

CIVILPROCEDURE IXV.SUBJECTMATTERJURISDICTION
AmountinControversy Lessimportantthancompletediversityandsocourtsmorelenient Canoftenaddadd'lclaimsforlesseramountifatleastoneclaim>$75,000. ClassAction,atleastonepersonhastomeettheamount Measureamountirrespectiveofsetoffsorcounterclaims Singlecanaggregateamountseveniftheyareunrelatediftheyariseunderthe sameaction. Differentpeoplecannotaggregatecomplaints. Rednerv.Sanders P:federaljurisdictionisbasedon smoveunderFed.R.Civ.P.12(b)(1)todismissforlackof jurisdiction. Facts: D1andD2=NYresidents corpDhasprincipleplaceofbusinessinNY applicablestatuteis28USC1332 PalsocitizenofNYbutraisedinCaliandmaintainsconnectionswithcali Sotryingtouse1332a(1)citizenofUSanddomiciledwithinthestateinquestion Reasoning:ItappearsinfactthatsarecitizensoftheStateofNewYork.Butforjurisdictionto existunder(a)(2)wouldneedtobeacitizenofaforeignstate,notmerelyaresident,andthe complaintitselfallegesthatisacitizenoftheUnitedStates. Holding:ThusthecasedoesnotinvolveanactionbetweencitizensoftheUnitedStatesanda citizenofaforeignstate.Thereisnojurisdictionunder1332(a)(2). Rule:IfaUScitizenislivingabroad,theyarestatelessandacitizenofeverystatewouldALWAYS DESTROYDIVERSITY CourtDomicileTest:presentdomicileandintenttoremainindefinitely

Saadehv.Farouki

Facts:GreekCitizensuesJordanianwhowasaPRA. Holding:In1988,Congressamended28U.S.C.1332(a)toprovidethataresidentalien shouldbeconsideredacitizenofthestateinwhichheisdomiciled.Theamendment eliminatedsubjectmatterjurisdictionovercasesbetweenacitizenofastateanda permanentresidentalienlivinginthesamestate. Areviewoftheamendment'slegislativehistory,however,showsthatCongressintendedto narrowthebreadthofdiversityjurisdiction,ratherthantoexpanditbyabrogating thecompletediversityrule.ThisisnottheCongressintent! o Didn'twanttocreatemorecitizenshipforforeignerstosueourresidentaliens Thiscaseisdismissedforlackofsubjectmatterjurisdiction. Implicatea"formidableconstitutionaldifficulty"? o ArticleIII:JudicialpowershallextendtocasesbetweencitizensofaU.S.stateand "foreignCitizensorSubects." Butnottosuitsbtwtwoforeigncitizens 1988Amendmentto1332(a) LegalPermanentresidentshavejurisdictioninthatstate AnalienadmittedtotheUSforpermanentresidenceshallbedeemedacitizenofthe stateinwhichsuchalienisdomiciled. ReverseofRednerrule

CIVILPROCEDURE IXV.SUBJECTMATTERJURISDICTION StrawbridgeorCompleteDiversityRule

Strawbridgev.Curtiss Multiplediversepartiesifthereisonepartywiththesamestatecitizenshipasthatof anopposingparty,willdestroydiversity NoPcansharecitizenshipoftheD Musthavecompletediversity Mustbecitizensofdifferentstates AcasemayinvolvemultiplePsandmultipleDs CorporationCitizenshipRule28USC1332(c) Partnershipcouldbeworldwidedependingonthecitizenshipinthevariousstates ofthevariouspartners. Toavoidjointandseveralliability Corporationshavedualcitizenships:(ifaPisacitizenofeitherofthesestates diversityjurisdictionisunavailable) 1. Whereitisincorporatedwherecorporationiscreated 2. Whereithasitschiefplaceofbusiness Wheremostofphysicalactivitiestakesplace Wherethecorporateheadquarters Orahybridbutifthemuscleandnerveareindifferentstates,gow/ nerve Purpose:preventlocalstateclaimsbetweenacitizenandlocalcorporation, incorporatedelsewhereforconvenience FamilyandProbateexceptions Thecourtdoesn'thaveoriginaljurisdictiontodivorceandalimony Nofederaldiversityjurisdictionoveradivorcecaseevenifpartiesliveindifferent states 1. Exception:Interstatechildkidnapping CitizenshipofIndividuals o Courtslooktothedomicileofapartyindeterminingifthatpersonisacitizenofastate Test: MustbebothaCitizenoftheU.S.andbedomiciledinastate Permanentresidentalienstreatedasacitizenofthestateinwhichsheisdomiciled TheFederalInterpleaderAct,28USC1335providesforfedjurisdictionsolongasany Claimanttoadisputedfundisofcitizenshipdifferentfromthatofanyother.The legislativehistoryofthisstatutesuggeststhatlegislatorsthoughtthatwithoutit,courtsof differentstatescouldissueconflictingjudgmentsawardingthesamepropertytodifferent claimants. TheClassActionFairnessActof200528USC1332(CAFA) o providesforfederaldiversityjurisdictioninclassactionsoveramountsinexcessof.$5 millioninwhichanymemberoftheclasspossessestherequisitediversitybasedonstate orforeigncitizenship. o ThelegislativehistorysuggeststhatCongresswasconcernedthatstatecourtswere hearinganddecidingclassactionsinwhichmanyormostmembersoftheclasscame fromotherstates;itreachedfordiversityjurisdictionasawaytoaddressthisproblem, Therulesfordeterminingsuchcitizenshipfordiversity purposesaresetoutin

CIVILPROCEDURE IXV.SUBJECTMATTERJURISDICTION
a.Thecorporationhasdualcitizenship:whereitisincorporatedandwhereithasitshe purposeofthedualcitizenshipistopreventwhatCongressthoughtwereessentiallylocal stateclaimsbetweenacitizenandalocalcorporation,incorporatedelsewherefor convenience,fromburdeningthefederalcourts.Manycorporations incorporateunderthelawofastatedeemedtohavemorepermissivecorporationlaws thanthoseofthestateoftheirchiefplaceofbusiness.Delaware,forexample,ismore oftenthelegal"home"ofcorporationsthanitistheirchiefplaceofbusiness.

SupplementalJurisdiction
o o

InreAmeriquestMortgageCo.MortgageLendingPracticesLitigation

Expandsjurisdictiontoapoint,possiblybeyondwhatArticleIIIwouldbear JurisdictionoverwhichFederalcourtwouldnothaveoriginaljurisdiction. 28USC1367(a) (a)Exceptasprovidedinsubsections(b)and(c)orasexpresslyprovidedotherwise byFederalstatute,inanycivilactionofwhichthedistrictcourtshaveoriginal jurisdiction,thedistrictcourtsshallhavesupplementaljurisdictionoverallother claimsthataresorelatedtoclaimsintheactionwithinsuchoriginaljurisdiction thattheyformpartofthesamecaseorcontroversyunderArticleIIIoftheUnited StatesConstitution.Suchsupplementaljurisdictionshallincludeclaimsthatinvolve thejoinderorinterventionofadditionalparties. o Districtcourtsshallhavesupplementaljurisdictionoverwhich o Doesn'treachoutsideconstitution Howdowereconcile? Judicialefficiency SupremeCourtsaysthattheseareacaseincontroversy. UnitedMineWorkersv.Gibbsp.207 InvolvesJoinderofclaimsbutusingsupplementaljurisdictioncanhave jurisdictionoverclaimsbutnotovertheclaims Casesariseoutofa"commonnucleusofoperativefact" Toall"casesandcontroversies"underArticleIII Differentthan1331and1332. 1367assumesthatrelatedcases(sametransaction) Thosecasesareforarticle3purposes Step1:comparefactsnecessarytoprovetheelementsofthefedclaimwiththose necessaryforthestateclaim Step2:askwhetherthestateclaimscanberesolvedordismissedwithoutaffecting thefedclaims oherecountsreliedoneachother 4exceptions: 1.)raisesanovelorcomplexissueofstatelaw 2.)theclaimsubstantiallypredominatesovertheclaimorclaimsoverwhichthedistrict courthasoriginaljurisdiction 3.)districtcourthasdismissedallclaimsoverwhichithasoriginaljurisdiction 4.)inexceptionalcircumstancesthereareothercompellingreasonsfordeclining jurisdiction Yestosupplementaljurisdiction Sufficientnexusofclaims Reason:courtcan'tconcludethatstateclaimdidn'thaveeffectoffederalclaim

CIVILPROCEDURE IXV.SUBJECTMATTERJURISDICTION
28USC1367(b)DiversityException (b)Inanycivilactionofwhichthedistrictcourtshaveoriginaljurisdictionfounded solelyonsection1332ofthistitle,thedistrictcourtsshallnothavesupplemental jurisdictionundersubsection(a)overclaimsbysagainstpersonsmadeparties underRule14,19,20,or24oftheFederalRulesofCivilProcedure,oroverclaimsby personsproposedtobejoinedassunderRule19ofsuchrules,orseekingto interveneassunderRule24ofsuchrules,whenexercisingsupplemental jurisdictionoversuchclaimswouldbeinconsistentwiththejurisdictional requirementsofsection1332. RequiredJoiner PermissiveJoinder Intervention Don'tariseunderfederalclaim HostilitytowarddiversitycasesinCongressandthecourts Congressdoesn'thavetotakeallofthefederaljurisdictionthattheycould 28USC1367(c)DiscretionException 1367.Supplementaljurisdiction (c)Thedistrictcourtsmaydeclinetoexercisesupplementaljurisdictionoveraclaim undersubsection(a)if (1)theclaimraisesanovelorcomplexissueofStatelaw, (2)theclaimsubstantiallypredominatesovertheclaimorclaimsoverwhich thedistrictcourthasoriginaljurisdiction, Measuredinfactuallycomplicated Ex.SzendreyRamosv.FirstBancorp SzendreyRamosv.FirstBancorp Holding:Pshadbroughtanumberorcomplexstateclaims,which requiredextensivefactualanalysis COMPLEXISSUEOFFEDERALLAW,STATECLAIMPREDOMINATES FEDERALCLAIM FirsttimeissuehadbeendecidedinPR (3)thedistrictcourthasdismissedallclaimsoverwhichithasoriginal jurisdiction,or (4)inexceptionalcircumstances,thereareothercompellingreasonsfor decliningjurisdiction. Article3permitsfeddistrictscourtsoincludetheirjurisdictionsomeclaimsoverwhich theywouldnothaveoriginaljurisdictionfitheyaresufficientlyrelatedtoclaimsover whichtheydohaveoriginaljurisdiction Bestowedby1367a Limitedby1367b Subjecttotheexerciseofjudicialdiscretionby1367c

Removal

DgetstochoosetheforumexceptwhenitsaDiversitycaseinthestatethattheDis domiciled Note:canonlyremoveittoFederalDistrictthatembracesthestatecourt Removew/in30daysoftheserviceofprocessthatmakesthedocumentremovable 28USC1441 DhasoneshotatremovingifitwouldinvokeDiversityorSubjectMatterJurisdictions

Pinitiallyfilesaclaiminstatecourt,anditcouldveoriginallyhavebeenin FederalCourt

CIVILPROCEDURE IXV.SUBJECTMATTERJURISDICTION
(a)ExceptasotherwiseexpresslyprovidedbyActofCongress,anycivilactionbroughtinaState courtofwhichthedistrictcourtsoftheUnitedStateshaveoriginaljurisdiction,mayberemoved bytheorthes,tothedistrictcourtoftheUnitedStatesforthedistrictanddivision embracingtheplacewheresuchactionispending.Forpurposesofremovalunderthischapter, thecitizenshipofssuedunderfictitiousnamesshallbedisregarded. Originaljurisdictionwouldhaveexisted.

(b)Anycivilactionofwhichthedistrictcourtshaveoriginaljurisdictionfoundedonaclaimor rightarisingundertheConstitution,treatiesorlawsoftheUnitedStatesshallberemovable withoutregardtothecitizenshiporresidenceoftheparties.Anyothersuchactionshallbe removableonlyifnoneofthepartiesininterestproperlyjoinedandservedassisacitizenof theStateinwhichsuchactionisbrought. IfSarasuesNewman,inStatecourtinsteadofFederalcourt,Newmancan'tmoveitto Federalcourt 28USC1446 (a)AorsdesiringtoremoveanycivilactionorcriminalprosecutionfromaStatecourtshall fileinthedistrictcourtoftheUnitedStatesforthedistrictanddivisionwithinwhichsuchaction ispendinganoticeofremovalsignedpursuanttoRule11oftheFederalRulesofCivilProcedure andcontainingashortandplainstatementofthegroundsforremoval,togetherwithacopyof allprocess,pleadings,andordersserveduponsuchorsinsuchaction. (b)Thenoticeofremovalofacivilactionorproceedingshallbefiledwithinthirtydaysafterthe receiptbythe,throughserviceorotherwise,ofacopyoftheinitialpleadingsettingforththe claimforreliefuponwhichsuchactionorproceedingisbased,orwithinthirtydaysafterthe serviceofsummonsupontheifsuchinitialpleadinghasthenbeenfiledincourtandisnot requiredtobeservedonthe,whicheverperiodisshorter. Ifthecasestatedbytheinitialpleadingisnotremovable,anoticeofremovalmaybefiled withinthirtydaysafterreceiptbythe,throughserviceorotherwise,ofacopyofanamended pleading,motion,orderorotherpaperfromwhichitmayfirstbeascertainedthatthecaseis onewhichisorhasbecomeremovable,exceptthatacasemaynotberemovedonthebasisof jurisdictionconferredbysection1332ofthistitlemorethan1yearaftercommencementof theaction. Note:TheCLAIMhastohaveoriginaljurisdiction,notthedefense Notdiscretionary Removaljurisdictionisorginialyoueitherhaveitoryoudon't P(FL)suesD(NJ)andE(NY)inNY,notremovablebecauseofthestrawbridgerule.Disnotbeing discriminatedagainstit.

CIVILPROCEDURE XV.CHOICEOFLAW
BIGQUESTION:HowdoestheconstitutionensurethatFederalandStateCourtsystemsrespecteach other'sspheresofpower?

A. StateCourtsAsLawmakersinaFederalSystem
1. JudiciaryAct 2. RulesofDecisionAct(28USC1652): i. TheRulesofDecisionAct(hereinafterRODA)providedthat"thelawsoftheseveral states,exceptwheretheconstitution,treaties,orstatutesoftheUnitedStates,incases wheretheyapply." ii. Statesshallotherwiserequireorprovide,shallberegardedastherulesofdecision"in thefederalcourts. iii. RODAremainsineffect,withslightmodifications. Eriestemsfromthe1789RulesofDecisionActandtheSupremeCourt'sinterpretationofthatactin Swiftv.TysonTheSupremeCourt'smostimportantpreErieinterpretationofRODA Involveda"billofexchange" Issue:whichlawappliedtotheSubstantivequestion o WereNewYorkcasespartof"thelaws"ofthatstateandthusbindingonfederaldistrict court? Holding:No.Itwouldbeboundbystatestatutesandstatejudgemadelawonmattersofpeculiarly "localmatters"butnotongeneraltopics Instead,afederalcourtcouldmakeanindependentinterpretationofwhatthecommonlawrule wasontheparticularsubject. o Gavejudicialindependence Rationale:turnedonthemeaningoftheword"laws"inRODA. ErieR.R.v.Tomkins(1938) Facts:inEriewashitbyatrainwhilewalkingalongthetracksofrailroad.Hesuedtherailroadina federaldistrictcourtbasedondiversityjurisdiction,claimingthattherailroadhadactednegligentlyby leavingthedoortooneofthecarsopen.TheaccidenthappenedinPennsylvania. Whywasthecasefiledinfederalcourt? Penn.LawnegligencewasenoughtocreateliabilityforRR Fed.LawTompkin'sattyswantedtofileinFedcasetheyforumshoppedintofederalcourt AttyrelyingonSwift. Swiftv.Tysoninterpreted RulesDecisionAct Indiversitycasescourtsapplystatelaw. Statelawmeansstatestatutes,notcommonlaw GeneralFederalCommonLaw Clashoflaws:UnderPennsylvanialaw,couldrecoveronlyuponashowingof"wanton"negligence becausehewouldbeconsideredatrespasserontherailroad'srightofway.,however,arguedthatthe federalcourtshouldapplythe"general"orfederalcommonlaw,whichrequiredtherailroadtoactwith ordinarycare. WhatdidtheSupremeCourtdecide? Holding:TheSupremeCourtheldthatthelowercourtwasobligatedtoapplyPennsylvania'swanton negligencestandard. Rationale:TheCourtoverturneditsearlierholdinginSwift,findingthatthereferenceto"laws"inRODA includednotonlystatestatutelawbutalsostatejudicialopinionsinterpretingthecommonlaw. TotheCourt,thetermincludedonlystatestatutesandlocalcommonlawsuchasrulesgoverning realproperty.Bycontrast,courtdecisionsinterpretingthegeneralcommonlawwerenot"laws" withinthemeaningofRODA.

CIVILPROCEDURE XV.CHOICEOFLAW
Viewofcommonlaw:TheErieCourtrejectedtheideathattherewasa"general"commonlawthat appliedwithequalforceinallcommonlawjurisdictions.Instead,thecourtindicatedthateach sovereignstatecreateditsowncommonlaw. Federalcourtsandcommonlaw:TheCourtalsoheldthatfederalcourts,unlikestatecourts,hadno powertocreatecommonlaw.Therefore,RODArequiredthefederalcourtstofollowthecommon lawrulessetoutbythestatecourts. What'sthebigdealaboutthiscase? Erie:TheSupremeCourtrevisitedRODAinErieRailroadv.Tompkins,304U.S.64(1938). ErienotonlyoverturnedSwift'sinterpretationofRODAbutalsoreplaceditsviewofa"general" commonlawwithanentirelydifferentparadigm. NOTE:ERIEANDTHEPERSISTENCEOFFEDERALCOMMONLAW Eriesaysthereis"nofederalgeneralcommonlaw" o Notreallytrue,Erieholdsthatonly"general"fed.Commonlawmaynotdisplacethatofthe statesinareasinwhichtheConstitutiongrantslawmakingpowertothestates CourtscancreateGeneralcommonlawin o admiraltyandmaritimecases o Federalstatute o Antitrustlaw o Laborlaw TheLimitsofStatePowerinFederalCourts o Noonedoubtsthefederalpoweroverprocedure o Statelawapplieditclearlyrequiredreversal o Thestatelawinvolvedwasclearlysubstantive Wasjustaboutwhowasliable. o Applyingstatelawraisednoquestionsabouttheintegrityofthefederalcourtsasan independentjudicialsystem o InterpretingtheConstitutionalCommandofErie

GuarantyTrustCo.v.York

Facts:Psuedabondtrusteeallegingmisrepresentationandbreachoftrustfederaldiversityaction NewYorksubstantivelaw. DinvokedNYSOL. Pargueditwasontheequitysideoffederalcourt ProceduralHistory: CircuitCtP'sclaimnotbarred SCP'sclaimwasbarred Issue:whetherwhennorecoverycouldbehadinStatecourtb/ctheactionwasbarredbySOL,afedcourt inequitycanrecognizesuitb/cthereisdiversityofjurisdictionoftheparties. Rule:Astatestatuteoflimitationscouldclearlychangetheoutcome,asitpreventsthecourtfromeven hearingthecase.TheCourtheldthatitshouldbetreatedasasubstantiveruleforErie. OutcomedeterminativetestDoesastatutesignificantlyaffecttheoutcomeofalitigationforafederal court? TheCourtruledthatanyrulethatcouldaffecttheoutcomeshouldbeconsideredsubstantiveunderErie. Substancev.Procedure StateFederal

Byrdv.BlueRidgeRuralElectricCooperative

Facts:PwasinjuredonaconstructionjobforDsuedintort.ApplySCWorkmen'sCompAct.

CIVILPROCEDURE XV.CHOICEOFLAW
Issue:Infederaldiversitycases,mustthefederalpracticeofallowingjurytodeterminefactualdisputesyield toastaterulethatprovidesforjudgestodeterminefactualdisputesincertaincases? Test:Balanceofinterestinwhichthecourtweighswhetherthestateorfederaljudicialsystemhasthe greaterinterestinhavingitsruleapply Statelawrightsandobligation Comparethestateandfederalpoliciesserved o Whatistheimportanceofthelawinstate/federal strongfederalinterest OutcomedeterminativetestfromGuaranteedTrust

Judge/jurynotoutcomedeterminative

Hannav.PlumerIstheresomefederaldirective?>Yes,thenwilltrumpstatelaw
RulesEnablingAct:Congressclearlyhastheconstitutionalauthoritytoenactlawscontrollingtheprocedure usedinthefederalcourts.However,CongressdelegatedalargeportionofthisauthoritytotheSupremeCourt intheRulesEnablingAct(REA),28U.S.C.2072.WhentheCourtcreatesafederalruleunderthisdelegated power,theruleoverridesstatelawundertheSupremacyClause Holding:aFed.CourtcouldapplyRule4(e)(2)(B)insteadofstatelawtodeterminehowprocesswouldbe served Newtest:Thus,afederalcourtmustapplystatelawonlywhenfailuretodosowouldlikelyresultinforum shoppingbetweenstateandfederalcourtsbecauseofthelikelihoodofadifferentoutcome. i. ForumShoppingfederalcourtmustapplystatelawonlyifthelikelihoodofadifferentoutcomeis sogreatthatthePwouldbaseherchoiceofforumonthedifferentrules Note:EriedoesnotvoidaFederalRule i. IsthestatuteorRuleconstitutional? 1. Whatdoesitthefederalcourttodo? ii. IsthisdealingwiththeFRCP? 1. Istheruleoneofpracticeandprocedure? 2. Istheprocedurespecifiedintheruleconstitutional? iii. DeterminingtheScopeofFederalLaw:AvoidingandAccommodatingErie SemteckIntl.Incv.LockheedMartinCorp. Issue:Whetherclaimpreclusiveeffectoffed.JudgmentdismissingadiversityactiononSOL groundsisdeterminedbythelawofthestateinwhichfederalcourtsits. Scalia:SemtekandShadyGrove Semtek WhydoesScaliaconcludeclaimpreclusion doesn'tapplytoSemtek'sMdcase? ShadyGrove IsthiscasejustHannareiteration,ordoesitsay somethingmore? Istherulevalid?Thenitwins

Doeshistreatmentofrule41makeanysense? Howcanonereconcilethiscasew/Semtek? Rule41(b)InvoluntaryDismissal Estop ResJudicataapplyingjudgmentfrom Californiafederalcourt Validrulebutreadsittogetaroundclaim preclusion Isapplyingfederalcommonlaw? Whataboutconcurrenceabout? HeagreedthatRule23appliesinthiscase,butalso recognizedthatinsomecasesfederalcourtsshould

CIVILPROCEDURE XV.CHOICEOFLAW
applystateproceduralrulesindiversitycasesbecause theyfunctionaspartofthestate'sdefinitionof substantiverightsandremedies. Notpayingenoughattentiontostateinterests Whatinterestdoesheviewasparamount? Whatspacedoeshecarveout? 253Q4Willthestatecourtbeprecluded? Yes.Whatisthefederalcourt'sinterestin applyingtherule Whatisthecontrollingopinioninthecase? WhatinterestdoesScaliaviewasirrelevant?

ShadyGrove v.AllstateInsuranceCo.
Facts:NYsrulesofCivProinconflictw/Rule23oftheFRCP Holding:FRCPdominatesprocedureinfederalcourtallowedtheclassactioncasetobeheardinfederal court.RulesEnablingAct(notErie)controlsthevalidityofafederalruleofprocedure
Hannahv.Plumer
Isthereafederal DirecveonPoint?

ShadyGrove

IgnoreStateinterests whenthereisaclear, validfederalrule

Erie
ApplyState Substanvelaw

GuarantyTrustv. York
OutcomeDeterminave Testdetermineswhatis substanve

Byrd
BalanceofInterest

TwinAimsofErie
IftheFedJudgeignoresstate lawonthisissue,willitcause parestoocktoFederalcourt

AvoidForum Shopping

Inequitableadmin. ofthelaw