CVLkVILW Coal of l8C fasL speedy and cheap resoluLlon !

udlclal economy ls an overrldlng concern buL musL be

balanced agalnsL need Lo do subsLanLlve [usLlce
LLADINGS All pleadlngs should be consLrued Lo do subsLanLlal [usLlce leadlngs seL Lhe boundarles of a lawsulL
luncLlons of leadlng
1) Clves noLlce Lo parLles helplng Lhem prepare Lhelr case
2) LllmlnaLe spurlous clalms promoLlng [udlclal economy and proLecLlng llLlganLs from harassmenL
3) Pelp Lo narrow Lhe lssues sLreamllnlng Lhe case for Lrlal
4) Culde Lhe parLles and Lhe courL ln Lhe conducL of Lhe case helplng deflne Lhe scope of dlscovery and evldence
3) Supply a record for [udgmenL permlLLlng Lhe appllcaLlon of tes joJlcoto
5obstootlve low deLermlnes rlghLs for lnLeracLlons beLween people and beLween people and Lhe governmenL
ltoceJotol low makes Lhe promlses of subsLanLlve law real lL ls necessary for Lhere Lo be a prospecL of enforcemenL and
reallzaLlon of subsLanLlve law
ICCMLAIN1 (UC 228)
aku|e 8(a) C|a|m for ke||ef A pleadlng LhaL sLaLes a clalm for rellef musL conLaln
|ShorL plaln sLaLemenL of grounds for courL's [urlsdlcLlon
||ShorL plaln sLaLemenL of clalm showlng LhaL plalnLlff ls enLlLled Lo rellef
|||A demand for rellef soughL whlch may lnclude rellef ln Lhe alLernaLlve or dlff Lypes of rellef
1unlmporLanL CourLs wlll generally granL rellef even lf lL wasn'L demanded
bComplalnL lnlLlaLes proceedlngs alleges facLs showlng u's behavlor enLlLles Lo remedy or ln[uncLlon
|Coal ls Lo esLabllsh nause of an|on A legal Lheory of a lawsulL
1le a basls for sulng under subsLanLlve law
||MusL only sLaLe clalm under ooy Lheory noL [usL ossetteJ Lheory
1Can amend pleadlng under 1S(b) Lo conform Lo evldence aL Lrlal
21heory of Lhe pleadlngs may deLermlne appllcable sLaL llm
3CbllgaLlons of candor and care sLlll apply (kole 11)
|||ComplalnL musL be flled lnsLead of prlvaLe noLlce Lo [udge Lo afford due process Lo u
1u has rlghL Lo day ln courL"
nSuff|n|enn of nomp|a|n nas sa|d enough o overnome 12(b)(6)?
| lf cause of acLlon lnsufflclenL 12(b)(6) moLlon Lo dlsmlss wlll be granLed for fallure Lo sLaLe a clalm upon
whlch rellef can be granLed"
1Assumlng all facLs of complalnL are Lrue cannoL recover under Lhe law
||Monwi// ComplalnL sLaLed LhaL Llmebarred debL was renewed by moral obllgaLlon arlslng from oral
promlse Lo repay
1Law sald renewal of debL musL be ln wrlLlng A moral obllgaLlon Lo repay ls noL valld conslderaLlon for
an oral conLracL
2 cannoL proceed wlLh cause of acLlon b/c he falled Lo asserL all Lhe necessary elemenLs of a conLracL
under u1 law 1here are no promlses of subsLanLlve law lefL Lo be enforced Pe
|||ArgumenL for lnLerlocuLory appeal promoLes efflclency where lL ls llkely LhaL case can be flnally dlsposed of
on appeal or where appeal ls requlred as basls for Lrlal Lo proceed
|vArgumenL agalnsL can delay procedures and annoy Lrlal [udge
vuoobleJlsctetloo prlnclple ulsLrlcL + appeals courL musL boLh agree LhaL appeal can be made
dIunn|on of modern p|ead|ng 1o glve noLlce of clalms or defenses
|uioquordi 8epresenLs modern llberal vlew of pleadlng does noL have Lo allege all facLs necessary Lo
prove a clalm noLlce ls key funcLlon
1 lalnLlff musL noL be denled hls day ln courL
||u can use dlscovery from Lo esLabllsh a defense lf few facLs are sLaLed ln Lhe pleadlng
|||lorclng Loo much dlsclosure can ellmlnaLe 's leverage for seLLlemenL
18uL noLlce pleadlng noL necessarlly klnder Lo plalnLlff he has burden of greaLer evldence/dlscovery
sLandards under noLlce pleadlng
2Also bare noLlce ls lnsufflclenL musL sLaLe general clrcumsLances glvlng rlse Lo clalm
|v6i//ispie lalnLlff dld noL dlsclose any facLs whlch mlghL ldenLlfy Lhe occaslon or descrlbe Lhe clrcumsLances
of Lhe alleged wrongful conducL so Lhere was no facLual basls Lo apply Lhe law and no basls for recovery
18epresenLs old facL pleadlng sLandard complalnL musL allege maLerlal essenLlal ulLlmaLe facLs
2Cllllsple would prevall under 8ule 8(a) modern pleadlng she gave a daLe locaLlon and amL soughL
3A fottlotl lf one Lhlng ls Lrue Lhen Lhe oLher has Lo be Lrue lf uloguardl's complalnL was sufflclenL
under 8(a) Lhen Cllllsple's musL be
eL|emens p|ead|ng (UC 228)
|ComplalnL musL plead facLs whlch consLlLuLe all maLerlal elemenLs necessary Lo susLaln recovery under some
vlable legal Lheory
||Arguably Lhe Je focto fed pleadlng sLandard where noL requlred mosL compeLenL lawyers wlll follow
fCher p|ead|ng sandards
|ne|ghened p|ead|ng sandard (UC 230)
1Leothermon sald lnconslsLenL w/noLlce pleadlng
aAcLlons agalnsL munl employees need noL sLaLe why Lhey are noL lmmune
bMusL use S! + dlscovery Lo weed ouL frlvolous clalms
29(b) helghLened pleadlng llmlLed Lo fraud anLlLrusL Pave Lo amend l8C Lo lnclude 1983 cases
|||aus|b||| p|ead|ng (UC 232) 1wombly sald pleadlngs musL cross llne from concelvable plooslble
1 More Lhan posslblllLy less Lhan probablllLy
2 May be applled flexlbly ln cerLaln cases (le anLlLrusL)
f nas sa|d oo munh? (UC 23S)
|8(d) Conn|se + D|ren A|erna|ve Saemens Innons|senn
1AllegaLlon musL be slmple conclse dlrecL no form requlred
2A pleadlng may sLaLe alLernaLlve clalms or defenses and ls sufflclenL lf any of Lhem ls sufflclenL
3arLy may sLaLe as many clalms + defenses as Lhey have regardless of conslsLency
||Mccormick v kopmon u drove Lruck whlch colllded w/ 's husband clalmed u negllgenLly drove over
cenLer llne and alLernaLlvely LhaL Pulls negllgenLly served hlm alcohol causlng hlm Lo geL drunk and cause
accldenL u's moLlon Lo dlsmlss denled lnconslsLenL pleadlng allowed lf uncerLaln abouL facLs
1AlLernaLlve pleadlng ls approprlaLe where ls genulnely ln doubL as Lo whaL Lhe facLs are and whaL
Lhe evldence wlll show
AAlLernaLlve pleas noL admlsslons of facL else would be a Lrap
8uL noL valld lf knows one clalm ls false
2 !usLlce mlghL noL be done lf alLernaLlve clalms noL allowed
A mlghL noL be able Lo afford 2 lawsulLs
Lawyer worklng for conLlngencyfee mlghL noL accepL case w/only one Lheory
3Sub[ecL Lo candor + care ALLorneys musL make reasonable lnqulry lnLo facLs (11(b))
A8urden for sulng has conLlnued Lo rlse don'L wanL Lo wasLe [udlclal resources or allow Lo
exLorL seLLlemenL or cause undue expense for Lhe u
SeparaLe Lrlals may be preferable nuances of compeLlng clalms may confuse [ury

2ANSWLk (UC 260)
a8esponses Lo Lhe 's allegaLlons 1) uenlal/Admlsslon 2) AfflrmaLlve uefense 3) CounLer/crossclalms
|Den|a| ku|e 8(b)(2) MusL admlL or deny ever allegaLlon ln Lhe pleadlng ln shorL + plaln Lerms
1lallure Lo deny admlLLance 8(b)(6)
2Lack of sufflclenL lnfo denlal 8(b)(S)
3 uenlals sobttoct from Lhe sLory revenL plalnLlff from esLabllshlng evldence LhaL ls vlLal Lo allegaLlons
||Aff|rma|ve defenses 8(n) noL a denlal of facL buL a SC WPA1?"
1Genera|
AMuS1 be lncluded ln answer as condlLlon of admlsslblllLy of supporLlng evldence aL Lrlal
|LxcepLlon opponenL falls Lo ob[ecL or courL permlLs amendmenL of pleadlng aL Lrlal
||8eLLer Lo plead Au when ln doubL Lo avold rlsk of excluded evldence
|||lf answer amended Lo lnclude Au and 's ob[ecLlon susLalned u wlll seek Lo amend hls
pleadlng
Au eolotqes Lhe sLory Lo encompass elemenLs noL menLloned ln Lhe complalnL
|Lven lf 's clalms are Lrue u has a legal [usLlflcaLlon for hls acLlons
Cno responslve pleadlng requlred Lo Au doesn'L mean lLs admlLLed
DMay plead denlal and Au ln Lhe alLernaLlve
2Lxamp|es assumpLlon of rlsk conLrlbuLory negllgence duress esLoppel fraud lllegallLy laches res
[udlcaLa sLaLuLe of frauds sLaLuLe of llmlLaLlons and walver
3SLaLuLe of LlmlLaLlons Common Au depends on 3 facLors
AWhen Lhe clalm accrued (le came lnLo exlsLence)
|usually Llme of ln[ury
||SomeLlmes when should by exerclse of reasonable dlllgence have dlscovered hls ln[ury
erlod of llmlLaLlons
|Iarles longesL perlods assoclaLed wlLh clalms on prlor [udgmenLs
CWhen Lhe perlod Lolls or sLops runnlng 1olled lf
|u fraudulenLly concealed wrongdolng legally lncapaclLaLed servlce Lall allowed
Purposes of 5totute of Limitotions
ArevenLs u from belng sub[ecL Lo lndeflnlLe uncerLalnLy
Lncourages repose
CMoLlvaLes Lo brlng sulL whlle facLs are sLlll fresh ln Lhe mlnds of Lhe parLles lnvolved
SCases
A6omet v 1o/edo ;uallfled lmmunlLy ls an afflrmaLlve defense whlch offlclals musL plead
|u musL asserL LhaL he acLed ln good falLh Lo supporL Lhls defense
||8urden ls on u Lo plead avoldance or Au
lnqrohom v u5 uamage llmlLaLlon ls an afflrmaLlve defense whlch u walved by falllng Lo
ralse before Lrlal Aus musL be pled aL/before Lrlal Lo avold pre[udlce
|lf knew abouL defense earller would have Lrled Lo prove damages noL wlLhln llmlL or
aLLack llmlL's consLlLuLlonallLy
||8(n) ls noL an excluslve llsL of Aus LlmlLaLlon ls avo|danne under reslduary clause
admlLs Lhe facLs buL shows cause why Lhey should noL have Lhelr ordlnary legal effecL
|||Counern|a|ms AfflrmaLlve defenses requlrlng an answer

3 AMLNDMLN1S 1C LLADINGS (UC 267)
aku|e 1S(a) rer|a| A parLy may amend a pleadlng once as a maLLer of course w/ln 21 days
|CLherwlse courL should freely glve leave Lo amend as [usLlce requlres
1ke nons|dera|ons 8easonableness of Lhe delay and exLenL of Lhe resulLlng pre[udlce
AresumpLlon ls ln favor of amendmenL
Cnly rebuLLed lf unreasonable delay bad falLh or resulLs ln undue pre[udlce
Cundue pre[udlce ls usually preparaLlon pre[udlce" resulLlng from Lhe delay a subsLanLlal
llLlgaLlon dlsadvanLage LhaL Lhe opposlng parLy would noL have faced absenL Lhe delay
2CourLs may allow conLlnuance or addlLlonal dlscovery Lo mlLlgaLe pre[udlce
3lf Lhere ls delay alone wlLhouL pre[udlce musL be careful noL Lo punlsh Lhe cllenL
||Sandard of rev|ew Abuse of dlscreLlon
1resumpLlon ls ln favor of amendmenL so errors noL as common
21rlal courL ln besL poslLlon Lo know whaL ls pre[udlclal based on facLs
|||ls/ond creek v Loke 5hore operaLors of coal mlne purchased machlnery from u manufacLurer 1he
machlne broke down causlng properLy damage amended complalnL Lo plead afLersale negllgence lnsLead of
breach of warranL AmendmenL was granLed
13year delay ln amendlng complalnL was [usLlfled
A dldn'L know of defecL ln machlne unLll dlscovery began slow pace of Lrlal wasn'L 's faulL
2 Also delay dld noL pre[udlce u who already prepared defense for addlLlonal allegaLlons
|v 5trouss v uouq/os 4 years afLer complalnL u moved Lo amend answer Lo plead Au of sLaL llm AmendmenL
denled u knew of sLaLuLe of llmlLaLlons aL Llme of orlglnal complalnL
1 uelay ln pleadlng Au resulLed ln subsLanLlal pre[udlce Lo Case would have been Llmebarred lf
amendmenL allowed could have swlLched !us lf he knew earller
2 re[udlce lncreases Lhe longer Lhe delay Leave Lo freely amend mlLlgaLed by subsLanLlal pre[udlce
b ku|e 1S(b)(1) Amendmens dur|ng]afer r|a| lf a parLy ob[ecLs LhaL evldence ls noL wlLhln Lhe lssues ralsed ln
Lhe pleadlngs Lhe courL may permlL Lhe pleadlngs Lo be amended 1he courL should freely permlL an amendmenL ll
| uolng so wlll ald ln presenLlng Lhe merlLs Anu Lhe ob[ecLlng parLy falls Lo saLlsfy Lhe courL LhaL Lhe evldence
would pre[udlce LhaL parLy's acLlon or defense on Lhe merlLs
||re[udlce Same conslderaLlons as 13(a)
1Noe LhaL Lhe presumpLlon favorlng amendmenL ls sllghLly weakened once Lrlal has begun
|||1he courL may granL a conLlnuance Lo enable Lhe ob[ecLlng parLy Lo meeL Lhe evldence
1A conLlnuance wlll be less llkely Lo be granLed ln a [ury Lrlal
n ku|e 1S(b)(2) lf no ob[ecLlon Lo amendmenL [usL as good as ln Lhe pleadlngs
d ku|e 1S(n) ke|a|on an of Amendmens (Same ar|es) An amendmenL Lo a pleadlng relaLes back when
| (1)() 1he amendmenL asserLs a clalm or defense LhaL arose ouL of Lhe conducL LransacLlon or occurrence seL
ouL ln Lhe orlglnal pleadlng
11es ls Lhere sufflclenL overlap beLween new clalm and old one Lo allow relaLlon back?
AketotJ bypo Mlnlmal overlap b/L properLy damage and slander clalm
21he llberallLy wlLh whlch courLs apply Lhls sLandard should be lnformed by concerns of falrness and
noLlce Lo Lhe parLles
|| wotts v 4ritono Mlnor lnvolved ln accldenL ln whlch she was ln[ured and parenLs and slsLer kllled She
broughL sulL agalnsL SLaLe and lord for her ln[urles Also flled wrongful deaLh sulL agalnsL lord for all 3 parLles
and agalnsL SLaLe for her moLher and slsLer AfLer sLaL llm ran 's moved Lo amend wrongful deaLh complalnL
agalnsL SLaLe Lo add her faLher lL was allowed Lo relaLe back
1 Amended clalm arose from same accldenL as 1
sL
clalms so u had noLlce mlghL asserL new clalm
2 1he pre[udlce Lo u was mlnlmal b/c lL was already prepared Lo defend Lhe clalm
||| cox v coost/ine Mlnor was ln Lraln crash whlch ln[ured hlm and kllled hls parenLs Pe broughL sulL for
wrongful deaLh of hls parenLs AfLer sLaL llm ran moved Lo amend complalnL Lo add clalm for personal ln[urles
MoLlon Lo amend was denled noL allowed Lo relaLe back b/c asserLed new clalm LhaL alLered grounds for rellef
1Cox asserLed an unrelaLed clalm whlch caused greaLer pre[udlce Lo Lhe u who was unprepared Lo
defend lL
2PCWLIL8 Cox should have relaLed back under 1S(n) b/c new clalm arose from same lncldenL
3!udges llkely chose Lo unofflclally rely on old rule whlch Lhey were more comforLable lnLerpreLlng
Cld rule placed greaLer emphasls on wheLher amended pleadlng sLaLed new cause of acLlon
eke|a|on an w|h D|fferen ar|es (1)(C) AmendmenL changlng parLy or namlng of Lhe parLy relaLes back lf
|Clalm or defense arose ouL of same conducL LransacLlon or occurrence seL ouL ln lnlLlal pleadlng
||arLy Lo be added recelved noLlce wlLhln 120 days per (m)
1need noL be served only noLlce setvlce toll ls allowed
|||1A knew/should have known acLlon would have been broughL agalnsL hlm buL for a mlsLake of ldenLlLy
fworthinqton v wi/son arresLed by 2 offlcers who commlLLed pollce bruaLllLy llled complalnL agalnsL 3
unknown offlcers laLer amended hls complalnL Lo name unknown offlcers CLher 13(c) requlremenLs saLlsfled
buL amendmenL dld noL relaLe back b/c precedenL says changlng parLy name lack of knowledge noL mlsLake
|ulcLa 13(c) purpose ls Lo glve noLlce mlsLake should noL be separaLe requlremenL
||oom ||ne Some !us don'L conslder namlng unknown parLy a mlsLake won'L allow relaLlon back (7
Lh
Clrc)
1Some uC conslder lL a mlsLake and WlLL Sae our assump|on when answer|ng
g 5chiovone Peld LhaL old rule 13(c) requlred LhaL proper parLy had noLlce of acLlon before sLaLe llm explred 13(c)
amended ln 1991 Lo allow relaLlon back as long as conducL same and new parLy aware of complalnL w/ln 120 days
h Some sLaLes sLlll don'L allow relaLlon back b/c sLaL llm consldered Loo lmporLanL urpose of sLaL llm
| roLecLs u from belng sub[ecLed Lo lndeflnlLe uncerLalnLy
|| MoLlvaLes Lo brlng sulL whlle recollecLlons + evldence are sLlll fresh
kLUIkLMLN1 1nA1 LLADINGS L MADL IN GCCD IAI1n (UC 239)
a ku|e 11 8y presenLlng a pleadlng moLlon or oLher paper Lo Lhe courL wheLher by slgnlng flllng submlLLlng or
laLer advocaLlng lL an aLLorney or unrepresenLed parLy cerLlfles LhaL Lo Lhe besL of Lhe person's knowledge
lnformaLlon and bellef formed oftet oo lopolty teosoooble ooJet tbe cltcomstooces
|(b)(1) lL ls noL belng presenLed for lmproper purpose le harassmenL unnecessary delay or
needlessly lncreaslng cosLs
||(b)(2) clalms defenses and oLher legal conLenLlons are warranLed by exlsLlng law or nonfrlvolous argumenL
Lo exLend or modlfy law
|||(b)(3) Lhe facLual conLenLlons have evldenLlary supporL or are llkely Lo have supporL afLer
lnvesLlgaLlon/dlscovery and
|v(b)() Lhe denlals of facLual conLenLlons are warranLed by evldence or lf speclflcally so ldenLlfled are
reasonably based on bellef or lack of lnformaLlon
bSafe narbor ku|e 11(n)(2) LlLlganL mus be glven 21 days Lo formally wlLhdraw a clalm or defense once served
wlLh a 8ule 11 moLlon by Lhe opposlng aLLorney
|AfLer 21 days may Lhen brlng a moLlon for 8ule 11 sancLlons
||ALLorney may be sub[ecL Lo 8ule 11 sancLlons for fallure Lo respond Lo moLlon for sancLlons w/ln 21 days
|||Safe harbor does noL apply Lo show cause" orders lssued aL courL's lnlLlaLlve
n Goa| of ku|e 11 1o proLecL courLs and Lhe parLles agalnsL lncompeLenL or bad falLh lawyerlng
| ALLorneys musL cerLlfy LhaL pleadlngs are flled for a proper purpose and uslng reasonable care
|| 1o Lhls effecL all pleadlngs moLlons papers musL be slgned under 11(a)
dkequ|remens (foctots test)
|Improper urpose
111(b)(1) 1hls ls an openended sLandard 8equlres LhaL Lhe parLy be acLlng ln bad falLh Can be
lnferred from Lhe clrcumsLances
2lf aLLorney does noL know of lmproper purpose he may noL be held llable
||Lega| Suppor
111(b)(2) nonfrlvolous exLenslon of law" rullngs can Lurn on stote Jeclsls
2MusL walL reasonable amounL of Llme before Lrylng Lo modlfy law (one year noL enough)
3CourL shall noL brlng moneLary sancLlons agalnsL represenLed parLy for 11(b)(2) vlolaLlon As a non
aLLorney he ls noL expecLed Lo know Lhe legal merlLs of hls clalm
|||Lv|den|ar Suppor
111(b)(3) () ALLorney musL aLLempL Lo obLaln facLs from publlc sources noL rely solely on cllenL
28easonable lnqulry requlremenL ls mosL appllcable here
38epresenLed parLy less llkely Lo be sancLloned b/c a nonaLLorney would noL be expecLed Lo know Lhe
evldenLlary value of Lhelr clalm
1erminix 's aLLorney flled defamaLlon sulL soughL ln[uncLlon Lo prohlblL posLlng of slgn nelLher slde
uncovered conLrolllng precedenL whlch prohlblLed granLlng of ln[uncLlon on free speech grounds under
A consLlLuLlon (musL sue for damages afLerward) 's aLLorney sancLloned for lnadequaLe research
Alalllng Lo uncover conLrolllng precedenL ptlmo focle vlolaLlon
8uL lack of bad falLh + u's counsel's lnadequaLe research reduced u's award by half
CCourLs wlll cuL more slack for facLual lnvesLlgaLlon Lhan legal research (LhaL's whaL 8ule 13 ls for)
eSann|ons (n) May be lnlLlaLed soo spoote (fees go Lo courL) or by Lhe opposlng parLy (fees go Lo Lhem)
|11(n)(1) 1he courL ma lmpose sancLlons on any aLLorney law flrm or parLy LhaL vlolaLed Lhe rule or ls
responslble for Lhe vlolaLlon
1 1he #respons|b|e for he v|o|a|on" language ls whaL allows represenLed parLles Lo be sancLloned
||urpose of sancLlons Lo deLer SancLlons should be llmlLed Lo whaL ls necessary Lo deLer fuLure behavlor
1kotlooole 8uL for Lhe aLLorney's conducL oLher parLy would noL have lncurred fees
2coofllctloq objectlves need Lo relmburse cllenL v mlnlmum level of sancLlons needed Lo deLer
|||LlmlLed Lo reasonable aLLorney's fees and oLher expenses lncurred as a dlrecL resulL of Lhe vlolaLlon" and may
noL be awarded agalnsL lawyer's cllenL for brlnglng clalms noL warranLed by law
fSae|||e |||ga|on A fancy Lerm for 8ule 11 used Lo lmpress Shreve
g1993 Amendmen
|Abollshed mandaLory sancLlons ln favor of dlscreLlonary sancLlons
||Lquallzed Lhe burden on plalnLlffs and defendanLs applled Lo denlals
|||1he well grounded ln facL" requlremenL became evldenLlary supporL"
11hls ls a lesset burden for Lhe pleadlng parLy Lo meeL
|vAuLhorlzes cerLlflcaLlon of allegaLlons LhaL llkely" wlll have evldenLlary supporL
18elaxes Lhe former ban on flle now check laLer"
hArgumens for and aga|ns sr|n ku|e 11
|Ior
1ulscourages reckless pleadlngs
2ulscourages harasslng pleadlngs (LhreaL and reLreaL")
3Lncourages subsLanLlve falrness
Allowlng deLerrenL penalLles raLher Lhan llmlLlng relmbursemenL Lo cosLs lncurred allows Lhe rule
sufflclenL flexlblllLy Lo punlsh rlch llLlganLs
||Aga|ns
1lncreases saLelllLe llLlgaLlon vlolaLlng [udlclal economy
2ulsproporLlonaLe lmpacL on plalnLlff
3ueLers novel plalnLlff llLlgaLlon
IlolaLes Amerlcan rule agalnsL feeshlfLlng
kL1kIAL 1kIAL AND ALLLA1L kLSCUkCLS (conLlnuum p 83)
urpose of procedure Lo resolve maLLers LhaL remaln unclear Case should noL be allowed Lo proceed lf Lhe ouLcome ls
obvlous Coal ls Lo dlspose of maLLers as efflclenLly as posslble
1 DLMUkkLkS AND 12()(6) MC1ICNS (UC 2S)
a12(b)(6) Mo|on o d|sm|ss for fa||ure o sae a n|a|m under ku|e 8(a) 1he complalnL ls mlsslng an essenLlal
elemenL of a cause of acLlon even lf Lhe facLs of Lhe complalnL are Lrue Lhere ls no basls for rellef
|Goa|s
11o ensure Lhe avallablllLy of a legal formula [usLlfylng rellef on Lhe alleged facLs
AuCLS nC1 LesL or deLermlne Lhe facLs Lhemselves
21o ensure LhaL Lhe complalnL glves noLlce Lo Lhe defendanL
bWhen used 1o aLLack Lhe subsLance of Lhe complalnL musL be declded on Lhe complalnL alone
|Submlsslon of maLerlals ouLslde Lhe pleadlngs ln supporL or opposlLlon Lo a 12(b)(6) ls noL forbldden
||lL slmply converLs Lhe 12(b)(6) moLlon lnLo a moLlon for summary [udgmenL
n12(b)(6) |s an a|erna|ve o an answer
d12(b)(6) 8A8LL? granLed buL can dlspose of marglnal clalms and parLles lmpacL seLLlemenL dynamlcs
|lf granLed complalnL can be amended wlLhouL pre[udlce
||CranLlng of moLlon also appealable
1lf successfully appeals u musL flle responslve pleadlng
2u may also appeal buL walves rlghL once he answers
e12(n) MoLlon for [udgmenL on Lhe pleadlngs (noL lmporLanL)

2 SUMMAk IUDGMLN1 (UC 390)
aku|e S6 A parLy may move for S! ln parL or ln whole 1he courL shall granL S! lf Lhe movanL shows LhaL Lhere ls no
genulne dlspuLe as Lo any maLerlal facL and Lhe movanL ls enLlLled Lo [udgmenL as a maLLer of law 1he courL should
sLaLe on Lhe record Lhe reasons for granLlng or denylng Lhe moLlon
|May flle a moLlon for S! aL any Llme up Lo 30 days afLer close of dlscovery buL before Lrlal
bGoa| Coes beyond allegaLlons ln Lhe pleadlngs Lo evldence Lo show LhaL Lhere ls no genulne dlspuLe of
maLerlal facL LhaL would necesslLaLe or [usLlfy Lhe expense of Lrlal (ptomotes joJlclol ecooomy)
|ConslsLenL wlLh rlghL Lo [ury Lrlal b/c lL LesLs wheLher Lhere ls genulne dlspuLe of facL for [ury Lo resolve
||8y forclng parLles Lo prevlew evldence and relaLe lL Lo legal Lheorles moLlon for S! ls a form of dlscovery
|||Also can promoLe seLLlemenL by alerLlng nonmovanL Lo weakness of case
nSandard Could a reasonable [ury resolve Lhe lssue for Lhe nonmovanL by a preponderance of Lhe evldence?
|SLandard ls reasonable doubL noL sllghLesL doubL
||CourL wlll declde lf legal quesLlon ls avallable under any legal Lheory noL [usL Lhe one pleaded
1Summary [udgmenL ls Lhe preLrlal equlvalenL of a dlrecLed verdlcL
dSandard of rev|ew
| CranLlng of S! ls revlewed Je oovo lf reversed new Lrlal requlred
|| 8efusal Lo granL S! ls lnLerlocuLory (noL revlewable)
eMovan musL
|Show LhaL Lhere ls no genulne dlspuLe as Lo any maLerlal facL
1Cenulne dlspuLe Cne whlch a reasonable [ury could resolve agalnsL Lhe movanL
2MaLerlal facL An essenLlal elemenL of a clalm or defense
||Show LhaL Lhey are enLlLled Lo [udgmenL as a maLLer of law
1 Lven lf Lhe facLs alleged ln Lhe pleadlng are Lrue Lhe law says l musL wln"
|||ALLach affldavlL whlch seLs ouL admlsslble evldence ln supporL of moLlon
fNonmovanL may respond ln 4 ways
|uo noLhlng 8esponse ls only requlred under 36(e)(2) lf moLlon for S! ls properly made and supporLed
18urden of producLlon ls on movanL
2Cne LhaL burden ls meL opposlng parLy musL seL ouL speclflc facLs showlng a genulne lssue for Lrlal S!
may be granLed lf he has no admlsslble evldence
||lf movanL meeLs burden of producLlon Lhen musL seL ouL speclflc focts showlng a genulne lssue for Lrlal
1wboley CounLeraffldavlL may seL ouL ulLlmaLe facLs and concluslons of law need noL be composed
wbolly of evldenLlary facLs
|||resenL affldavlL under 36(f) sLaLlng why he cannoL now presenL facLs ln opposlng Lo S (rare)
|v Crossmove for S!
1 8espondenL does noL conceded absence of Lrlable lssues by dolng so
eCour#s d|snre|on
|CourL may granL summary [udgmenL on lLs own
||CourL may granL S! on all or parL of a pleadlng
1May granL for llablllLy alone and seL Lrlal for damages
2May granL for less Lhan all clalms or parLles
f4/dermon v 8O Lravelllng on free pass sued u for negllgenLly causlng Lraln wreck vla defecLlve Lrack lree
pass exempLed rallroad for personal ln[ury llablllLy excepL for wlllful + wanLon mlsconducL
|CourL granLed S! Lo u based on Au of conLracLual walver
|| amended complalnL Lo allege wlllful + wanLon mlsconducL
|||Wlllful + wanLon requlres consclous conducL consclousness LhaL conducL ls llkely Lo cause ln[ury and Lhe
commlsslon of a wrongful acL or omlsslon of a duLy resulLlng ln ln[ury w/reckless lndlfference
|v could noL prove allegaLlons even lf conLlnuance was granLed Lo gaLher more evldence u dld noL know
of Lhe defecL ln Lhe Lrack
gwho/ey v low/er aLlenL aL u's hosplLal clalmed LhaL u negllgenLly LreaLed hlm for broken leg causlng lnfecLlon
lurLher alleged LhaL hosplLal employees negllgenLly falled Lo Lake precauLlons Lo prevenL spread of lnfecLlon
resulLlng ln ampuLaLlon below Lhe knee
| u's moLlon for S! denled desplLe subsLanLlal evldence ln lLs favor 1here was sufflclenL conLroversy abouL
facLs for case Lo proceed even Lhough had 1 affldavlL and u had 14 counLeraffldavlLs
||uoubLs abouL S! should be resolved ln favor of plalnLlffs
|||lalrness + [usLlce conslderaLlons ouwe|gh [udlclal economy sLakes hlgher for

IkL1kIAL CASL MANAGLMLN1 LIMI1ING AND SL11LING CASLS (UC 29)
aku|e 16 AuLhorlzes Lhe preLrlal conference
|(a) AL Lhe dlscreLlon of Lhe Lrlal [udge
||(n) arLles submlL preLrlal brlefs
|||(d) CourL musL enLer preLrlal order Lo preserve work done
burpose of prer|a| nonferenne 1o slmpllfy and shorLen Lrlal and posslbly promoLe seLLlemenL Also Lo
sLreamllne and expedlLe preLrlal llLlgaLlon
|noL a subsLlLuLe for dlscovery or Lrlal
nManager|a| purposes
|Goa| leadlng glves noLlce Lo Lhe parLles of whaL Lhe case MA? lnclude preLrlal conferences and orders
helps Lo deflne whaL Lhe lssues A8L on Lhe eve of Lrlal
1lalrness and Lrlal efflclency requlre hlgher degree of cerLalnLy as you approach Lrlal
||reLrlal order seLs boundarles for Lrlal
1SeLs conLrols on exLenL and Llmlng of dlscovery
2Who wlll LesLlfy and whaL LesLlmony wlll be abouL
3WhaL documenLs wlll be offered as evldence
ACourL can rule on Lhe admlsslblllLy of evldence
CourL may refuse Lo admlL evldence or wlLnesses aL Lrlal whlch are excluded from 1C
|||lf you sLray beyond boundarles blas ls ln favor of nC1 granLlng moLlon Lo amend
dromo|ng se|emen
||SeLLlemenL ls a naLural byproducL of Lhe 1C b/c Lhe exchange of conLenLlons admlsslons and evldence
makes Lhe parLles and Lhelr lawyers reassess Lhelr cases
|||Some [udges acLlvely promoLe seLLlemenL Lo compensaLe for parLles fear of appearlng weak by lnlLlaLlng
negoLlaLlons

IILAW IAC1 AND 1nL 1kIAL kCCLSS (pp 3233)
a Seps (113)
b Iunn|on of r|a| |s 2fo|d
| SlfL Lhe Lrue sLory from conLesLed facLual record
|| ALLach legal slgnlflcance Lo Lhe facLs
n 1he rospen of 1r|a|
| MosL cases never come Lo Lrlal Lhey are seLLled volunLarlly wlLhdrawn or Lhe merlLs declded before Lrlal
|| Powever Lhe ldea and prospecL of Lrlal sLrong lnfluences Lhe shape of procedure for clvll cases

IIIDIkLC1LD VLkDIC1 (ku|e S0(a))
aWhen used AfLer Lhe nonmovanL has presenLed all of Lhelr evldence Lo supporL Lhelr clalm buL before Lhe case ls
senL Lo Lhe [ury
bSandard 1here ls no legally sufflclenL evldence Lo flnd for Lhe nonmovanL le no reasonab|e [ur nou|d f|nd for
he oppos|ng par when Lhe evldence ls vlewed ln Lhe llghL mosL favorable Lo Lhem
|1hls ls a PlCPL8 sLandard Lhan agalnsL Lhe clear welghL of Lhe evldence
nurpose Small measure of [udlclal economy Lo be galned from uI
|lf Lhere ls no genulne lssue of law Lo be deLermlned Lhen don'L need Lo send case Lo [ury
||More popular wlLh u all Lhey have Lo do ls show LhaL one aspecL of 's case falls
dDrawbans
|lL ls revlewed Je oovo and all reasonable lnferences musL be drawn ln favor of Lhe nonmovanL so lL ls
relaLlvely easy Lo overLurn
||lf dlrecLed verdlcL overLurned a new Lrlal ls requlred
|||1herefore [udges ofLen walL for nCI whlch can be overLurned and verdlcL relnsLaLed
eLovender v kurn Paney employed as swlLchLender ln lL CenLral rallyard AfLer leLLlng lrlsco Lraln Lhrough he was
found a shorL whlle laLer face down near dlLch Pe dled from fracLured skull from blow Lo back of head from small
round ob[ecL sued for wrongful deaLh negllgence clalmlng Paney dled from blow from mall hook on back of Lraln
u sald he was murdered 1here was evldence on boLh sldes buL [ury found for
|Appeals courL reversed [ury declslon + dlrecLed verdlcL for u
||SCC1uS reversed uI and relnsLaLed 's verdlcL
11here was sufflclenL evldence Lo supporL verdlcL agalnsL lrlsco (negllgence) and lL CenLral for
malnLalnlng unsafe work envlronmenL (dark and on uneven ground)
2AfLer [ury reached declslon evldence supporLlng u's poslLlon became lrrelevanL on appeal
|||Lven lf subsLanLlal evldence supporLed u appeals courL has no rlghL Lo overrlde [ury declslon
11o do so Lhere musL be a nomp|ee absenne of suppor|ng ev|denne
2SubsLanLlal evldence agalnsL verdlcL ls noL sLrong enough sLandard

VIUDGMLN1 NCV (ku|e S0(b)) aka !udgmenL as a MaLLer of Law (UC S961 6672)
aWhen used AfLer a [ury verdlcL Lo render [udgmenL opposed Lo LhaL lndlcaLed by Lhe verdlcL
|CourL ls consldered Lo have submlLLed Lhe acLlon Lo Lhe [ury sub[ecL Lo Lhe courL's laLer decldlng Lhe legal
quesLlons ralsed by Lhe moLlon"
||nCI lmporLanL b/c lL ensures parLles have Lhelr day ln courL" buL also ensures case was declded on
Lhe law and rullng was noL blased
bkequ|remen MusL flrsL flle a moLlon for dlrecLed verdlcL afLer close of evldence
|!nCI ls a legal flcLlon whlch ls consldered a renewal of a moLlon for dlrecLed verdlcL
|| lf uI ls denled and you lose aL Lrlal you can renew Lhe moLlon afLer Lhe verdlcL
nSandard 1here ls no legally sufflclenL evldence Lo flnd for Lhe nonmovanL
durpose Conserve courL parLy resources Cne of few lnsLances ln Clv ro where delay serves [udlclal economy
|Less vulnerable Lo revlew Lhan S! or uI
||8educes necesslLy for neuLral afLer successful appeal
eSandard of rev|ew ue oovo (anew)
|!udges ofLen walL for nCI whlch ls also revlewed Je oovo buL can be overLurned and a verdlcL relnsLaLed

VI MC1ICN ICk NLW 1kIAL (ku|e S9) (UC 6166) Can be granLed for any reason for whlch one has prevlously been
granLed
a!udge's du Lo seL aslde a verdlcL supporLed by subsLanLlal evldence when evolootlve ettots exlsL
|AgalnsL Lhe clear welghL of Lhe evldence or
||8ased upon false evldence or
|||Wlll resulL ln a mlscarrlage of [usLlce
b!udge ma seL aslde verdlcL when ptocess ettots exlsL lf pre[ud|n|a| (adversely lmpacL subsLanLlve rlghLs)
|!udlclal errors ln lnsLrucLlng Lhe [ury/admlLLlng or commenLlng on evldence
||MlsconducL by parLles counsel wlLnesses or [urors
1er[ury
2Counsel mlsconducL
3lnLlmldaLlon
LxLraneous lnfo or ouLslde lnfluence LalnLed dellberaLlons
nn|gh| d|snre|onar easler Lo wln moLlon for new Lrlal Lhan for dlrecLed verdlcL
| 1he [udge should scruLlnlze mosL closely Lrlals LhaL are
1 Long compllcaLed and deal w/uncommon sub[ecL maLLer
|| 1he [udge should granL mosL deference Lo verdlcLs from
1 1rlals where Lhe key lssue ls wlLness credlblllLy
2 1rlals LhaL are slmple and deal w/famlllar sub[ecL maLLer
dSandard 1he LesL for granLlng a new Lrlal ls less resLrlcLlve Lhan Lhe LesL for uI/nCI
|no reasonable [ury clear welghL of Lhe evldence
||Lvldence whlch may be lnsufflclenL Lo supporL a dlrecLed verdlcL MA? be sufflclenL Lo granL a new Lrlal
eSandard of rev|ew Abuse of dlscreLlon
|CranL of new Lrlal ls lnLerlocuLory so noL appealable unLll flnal [udgmenL rendered afLer new Lrlal
||Iery dlfflculL Lo overLurn
f4etno v Yeotts ?eaLLs denled coverage by AeLna from hls lndemnlLy lnsurance b/c llablllLy he was seeklng
coverage for was lncurred durlng alleged performance of lllegal aborLlon Pe soughL declaraLory [udgmenL on hls
rlghL Lo obLaln lnsurance coverage 1rlal courL granLed declaraLory [udgmenL for ?eaLLs based only on hls LesLlmony
|u's moLlon for nCI denled b/c he dldn'L move for uI aL Lrlal
1Also welghL of Lhe evldence dld noL supporL uI for AeLna
||uenlal of new Lrlal upheld Lrlal [udge dld noL abuse hls dlscreLlon

VII kLLA1ICNSnI ]1 NCV AND NLW 1kIAL
aLoslng parLy may requesL new Lrlal or !nCI ln Lhe alLernaLlve
| lf Lrlal courL denles !nCI buL granLs new Lrlal noL lmmedlaLely appealable
|| lf Lrlal courLs denles !nCI and new Lrlal boLh declslons are appealable
1AppellaLe courL may enLer !nCI award new Lrlal or remand Lo Lrlal courL for new deLermlnaLlon
|||lf Lrlal courL granLs !nCI lL musL condlLlonally rule on new Lrlal moLlon ln anLlclpaLlon of reversal of !nCI
1AppellaLe courL wlll afflrm or reverse !nCI
2lf reversed Lhey may
ALnLer [udgmenL on Lhe verdlcL
8everse Lhe denlal of Lhe new Lrlal moLlon and order a new Lrlal or
C8emand Lo Lhe Lrlal courL for reconslderaLlon of Lhe new Lrlal moLlon

CCN1INUUM CI kL1kIAL AND 1kIAL SCkLLNING MC1ICNS

Mo|on 1o dlsmlss for
fallure Lo sLaLe a
clalm
lor [udgmenL on
Lhe pleadlngs
lor summary
[udgmenL
lor a dlrecLed
verdlcL
lor !udgmenL
nCI
ku|e 12(b)(6) 12(n) S6 S0(a) S0(b)
Movan D D or D or D or D or
Ianua| kenord ComplalnL leadlngs leadlngs +
AffldavlLs or
ulscovery
Lvldence lavorlng
Lhe arLy AgalnsL
Whom Lhe
MoLlon ls Made
Lvldence lavorlng
Lhe arLy AgalnsL
Whom Lhe
MoLlon ls Made
Sandard Lven lf facLs Lrue
no legal Lheory
can [usLlfy rellef
Same as 12(b)(6) no genulne lssue
of maLerlal facL

Legally
lnsufflclenL
evldence
Legally
lnsufflclenL
evldence

luncLlon of conLlnuum CeL rld of cases LhaL are noL deservlng of Lrlal

All 3 moLlons essenLlally ask Lhe same quesLlon uo Lhe esLabllshed facLs supporL a legal rule whlch should be applled Lo
declde all or parL of Lhe case?

*1he flrsL 3 moLlons promoLe [udlclal economy Lhey reduce Lhe cosL of resolvlng facLual dlspuLes (le facL funcLlon)

*1he prlmary raLlonale for uI and nCI lnsLead ls Lo preserve Lhe rlghLs of Lhe parLles under subsLanLlve law (le law
funcLlon aLLach Lhe proper legal slgnlflcance Lo seLLled facLs)


kLS IUDICA1A]kLCLUSICN
1he effecL of prlor ad[udlcaLlon on Lhe rlghLs of Lhe parLles Coverned by common law noL l8C

urposes of precluslon
akepose 1o free people from Lhe uncerLaln prospecL of llLlgaLlon wlLh lLs cosLs Lo emoLlonal peace and Lhe
orderlng of fuLure affalrs
bLnnourages [ud|n|a| eff|n|enn prevenLs burdenlng Lhe sysLem and encourages s Lo uLlllze resources ln Lhe mosL
effecLlve way LlLlgaLlon bears a burden of [usLlflcaLlon slnce lL ls soclally dlsrupLlve and [udlclal resources are scarce

1IN GLNLkAL (pp 88a88n 102a102n nourseboo)
a 1wo ways ln whlch lL can be used
|Lnfornemen !udgmenL credlLor can brlng a supplemenLal proceedlng Lo recover money from a debLor
uebLor ls barred from anyLhlng he sald or could have sald ln Lhe orlglnal proceedlng
||kenogn||on ln a subsequenL case Lhe parLles' legal poslLlons are dlfferenL Lhan Lhey would have been ln
Lhe absence of Lhe prlor ad[udlcaLlon
bGoa| recluslon proLecLs adversarles from unnecessary expense conserves [udlclal resources and relnforces
confldence ln Lhe [udlclal sysLem (by mlnlmlzlng Lhe posslblllLy of lnconslsLenL [udgmenL)
nlteclosloo ls cooslsteot w/Joe ptocess b/c precluded parLy has already had a full falr opporLunlLy Lo llLlgaLe
d1rend of lncreased precluslon over Llme
|lL has become easler Lo ad[udlcaLe mulLlple clalms and Lhe lnLeresLs of mulLlple parLles ln a slngle lawsulL
due Lo Lhe llberal provlslons for clalm and parLy [olnder amendmenL of pleadlngs and dlscovery)
||8roadened precluslon promoLes conservaLlon of lncreaslngly scare [udlclal resources
eCan be offensive (llLlganL uses precluslon Lo advance a clalm) or defensive (uses precluslon Lo defeaL a clalm)
|lf offenslve succeeds sLlll has Lo prove case u may sLlll have oLher defenses and musL prove damages
||SLakes hlgher ln defenslve lf lL's successful loses
f1acLlcal advanLages of precluslon
|;ulcker cheaper Lo cover ground ln a case by lncorporaLlng developmenLs from earller cases
||8eLLer Lo wln by exLendlng prlor [udlclal vlcLory Lhan rlsk posslblllLy of loslng afresh
gClalm precluslon applles Lo defaulL [udgmenLs lssue precluslon does noL (lssue musL be lltlqoteJ)
hA|was sar w|h n|a|m pren|us|on lL has sweeplng effecLs on whaL one can do ln a 2
nd
lawsulL
| lssue precluslon on Lhe oLher hand presupposes LhaL Lhere ls a 2
nd
sulL le clalm precluslon doesn'L apply

2CLAIM kLCLUSICN (tes joJlcoto metqet ot bot)(UC p S30)
aDef|n||on A meLhod of prevenLlng parLles from presslng a clalm (oko coose of octloo) ldenLlcal Lo one
presenLed ln a prlor ad[udlcaLlon lf Lhe prlor case ends wlLh a flnal [udgmenL on Lhe merlLs parLles Lo lL are
foreclosed from llLlgaLlng Lhe same clalm ln a subsequenL proceedlng
|A clalm" encompasses all alLernaLlve legal Lheorles damages generaLed by orlglnal conLroversy
||A parLy may noL llLlgaLe a clalm and Lhen lf he wlns revlve Lhe same cause of acLlon wlLh a new Lheory
bCnLCkLIS1
|llnal [udgmenL on Lhe merlLs
1MosL sLaLes regard [udgmenL as flnal when appeals exhausLed some fed courLs flnal afLer Lrlal
2uefaulL [udgmenLs seLLlemenLs and summary [udgmenL flnal
||Conflned Lo Lhe same parLles (C8 Lhelr prlvles or asslgns)
1r|v| recluded parLy's lnLeresLs represenLed ln flrsL sulL
|||Same or suff|n|en| re|aed clalms (8S! 2(2))
1ConslderaLlons 1lme space orlgln moLlvaLlon convenlenL Lrlal unlL
2NC n|a|m sp|||ng allowed ln 8S!
nIudgmen for |a|n|ff 18 Merger When a valld flnal personal [udgmenL ls rendered ln favor of Lhe plalnLlff
| cannoL LhereafLer malnLaln an acLlon on Lhe orlglnal clalm or any parL Lhereof alLhough he may be able Lo
malnLaln an acLlon upon Lhe [udgmenL Anu
||ln acLlon upon Lhe [udgmenL u cannoL avall hlmself of defenses he mlghL have or dld lnLerpose ln 1sL acLlon
1 becomes joJqmeot cteJltot u joJqmeot Jebtot
2lf [udgmenL debLor falls Lo saLlsfy [udgmenL credlL may sue agaln rocedure ls summary ln naLure
Als Lhe defendanL ln facL Lhe debLor?
Pow much can Lhe [udgmenL debLor pay?
CAnd how soon?
dIudgmen for Defendan 19 ar A valld and flnal personal [udgmenL rendered ln favor of Lhe defendanL bars
anoLher acLlon by Lhe plalnLlff on Lhe same clalm
|Lxnep|ons o genera| ru|e of bar (20) llnal [udgmenL for u does noL bar new acLlon by on same clalm lf
1rlor case dlsmlssed for lack of [urlsdlcLlon lmproper venue or non[olnder/mls[olnder of parLles
2ulsmlssal wlLhouL pre[udlce
3Case does noL have precluslve effecL by rule or sLaLuLe
||lf brlngs subsequenL clalm relaLed Lo same LransacLlon precluslon has effecL of mandaLory clalm [olnder
eC|a|mSp|||ng kesaemens 2
|When clalm ls merged or barred cannoL rellLlgaLe any clalms whlch relaLe Lo Lhe same LransacLlon or
serles of LransacLlons from whlch Lhe prevlous clalm arose
||2S new clalm by barred even lf new evldence or legal Lheorles presenLed or new damages soughL
11hls ls whaL we meanL by 24
|||26 lf parLles agree clalms can be spllL or courL allows lL Lhen lL's Ck
2WhaL we dldn'L mean ln 24
fkush v Mop/e neiqhts
| broughL acLlon for properLy damage from car accldenL agalnsL clLy and won
|| Lhen broughL a personal ln[ury acLlon relaLed Lo same accldenL seeklng addlLlonal damages
|||She was clalm precluded her 2
nd
clalm merged lnLo Lhe 1
sL
(Jefeoslve pteclosloo)
glones v Morris P/on 8onk
|M8 sued Lo collecL 2 mlssed car paymenLs obLalned [udgmenL agalnsL !ones
||M8 sued agaln for anoLher mlssed paymenL buL was clalm precluded
|||Should have sued for all paymenLs ln flrsL case per k Clalm on 3
rd
paymenL merged wlLh clalm on flrsL 2
1u walved rlghL Lo sue for 3
rd
paymenL when he sued for flrsL 2
2Could've avolded Lhls ouLcome by reservlng rlghL Lo sue for lndlvldual paymenLs (per 26(1)(a))
hClalm precluslon vs Compulsory counLerclalm (8ule 13)
|lf counLerclalm should've been broughL buL wasn'L Lhen lL ls walved
||1hls ls called pren|us|on b ru|e buL has Lhe same effecL as clalm precluslon
|llnal [udgmenL on counLerclalm crossclalm or 3
rd
parLy clalm has same precluslve effecL as [udgmenL on 's clalm
3ISSUL kLCLUSICN (collotetol estoppel joJlclol estoppel) (UC p S3)
akesaemens 27 When an lssue of facL or law ls acLually llLlgaLed and deLermlned by a valld and flnal [udgmenL
and Lhe deLermlnaLlon ls essenLlal Lo Lhe [udgmenL Lhe deLermlnaLlon ls concluslve ln a subsequenL acLlon beLween
Lhe parLles wheLher on Lhe same or a dlfferenL clalm
|SupplemenLs clalm precluslon by glvlng flnal [udgmenL precluslve effecL ln cases noL sharlng same clalm
bCnLCkLIS1
|llnal [udgmenL on Lhe merlLs
||ldenLlcal lssue (of law or facL)
|||lssue acLually ralsed ln flrsL case
|vAd[udlcaLlon of Lhe lssue
1AcLually occurred
Ano defaulL !Ms consenL !Ms !Ms based on sLlpulaLlons of facLs
2Was necessary Lo Lhe [udgmenL
A1es 1ake Lhe ouLcome of Lhe lssue and fllp lL does Lhe resulL of Lhe prlor case change?
1hls req ensures loser puL ouL besL efforLs and wlll have opporLunlLy Lo appeal (usually)
vWould noL be unfalr Lo apply Lhe docLrlne agalnsL a parLy ln Lhe 2
nd
clalm (see exnep|ons below)
nLxnep|ons o |ssue pren|us|on beween SAML par|es kesaemens 28
|arLy soughL Lo be precluded could noL have obLalned revlew of Lhe lnlLlal [udgmenL as maLLer of law
11he rlghL of appeal ls from a [udgmenL noL a flndlng whlch ls lnconcluslve" (klos)
||2
nd
acLlon was noL sufflclenLly foreseeable
|||arLy dld noL have adequaLe lncenLlve Lo llLlgaLe flrsL clalm
1Lx damage clalm was small CourLs wlll seek Lo prevenL from lulllng u lnLo false sense of securlLy
dkios v uovis
|uavls sued opular ury Coods broughL 8los ln as 3
rd
parLy defendanL ln auLo accldenL case
||8los opular found negllgenL buL uavls was [udged conLrlbuLorlly negllgenL so 8los won
|||8los Lhen sued uavls for personal ln[ury ln a second sulL
|vuavls' defenslve lssue precluslon falled b/c 8los' negllgence was noL necessary Lo Lhe prlor [udgmenL uavls'
negllgence was Lhe sole basls for Lhe 1sL [udgmenL and 8los had no rlghL Lo appeal slnce he won
v8los falled Lo use offenslve lssue precluslon could have used flndlng of uavls' negllgence from prlor
case so LhaL he dldn'L have Lo prove lL all over agaln
v|ln fed courL 8los' negllgence clalm would be compulsory counLerclalm
e|nd|ng Nonpar|es o he Cr|g|na| Iudgmen
|no ldenLlLy of parLles requlremenL ln lssue precluslon (unllke clalm precluslon)
1A sLranger may blnd orlglnal parLles le new plalnLlff blnds defendanL already found negllgenL
2U1 ou nanno b|nd a rue sranger UNLLSS he had a nonro|||ng ro|e |n he pr|or |||ga|on
AAllowlng l agalnsL a sLranger vlolaLes due process
3SLrangers can be bound lf Lhey had a conLrolllng role b/c Lhey were a parLy ln all buL name
A1hey had a full and falr opporLunlLy Lo llLlgaLe Lhelr clalm so due process saLlsfled
||Loo a kesaemens 39 Lo deLermlne lf parLy had conLrolllng role A petsoo wbo ls oot o potty to oo
octloo bot coottols ot sobstootlolly pottlclpotes lo tbe coottol of tbe pteseototloo oo bebolf of o potty ls
boooJ by tbe Jetetmlootloo of lssoes JeclJeJ os tbooqb be wete o potty" (p 102c)
1MusL have conLrol over legal Lheorles and evldence presenLed and opporLunlLy Lo obLaln revlew
AWheLher lnvolvemenL equals conLrol ls a quesLlon of facL
Merely conLrlbuLlng funds advlce counsel or appearlng as omlcos ls lnsufflclenL
Cllnanclal sLake ln ouLcome ls lnsufflclenL by lLself
|||Montono v u5
1klewlL sued M1 ln sLaLe courL alleglng LhaL revenue Lax on publlc buL noL prlvaLe consLrucLlon
pro[ecLs was unconsLlLuLlonal and losL
2uS challenged Lax ln fed courL on same grounds led dlsLrlcL courL ruled LhaL uS noL bound by M1
rulng based on Supremacy Clause SLaLe of M1 appealed
3Cn appeal SCC1uS sald uS was defenslvely lssue precluded b/c lL was a prlvy Lo Lhe orlglnal case
A1hey dlrecLed Lhe M1 llLlgaLlon pald for lL and conLrolled Lhe appeals
|vcouefie/d v lide/ity cosuo/ty co of NY
11homas broughL grave desecraLlon case ln sLaLe courL and losL
2Cauefleld Lhen moved for Lrlal on same lssue ln fed courL u used defenslve lssue precluslon
31he parLles had same aLLorney legal Lheory evldence and same legal LesL used C also LesLlfled for 1
ACourL Look precluslon Lo Lhe exLreme C dld noL flnance/conLrol llLlgaLlon of 1's case So
cannoL blnd hlmm under 39
8uL concerns of [udlclal economy and falrness ouLwelghed denylng day ln courL esp slnce
had chance Lo [oln prlor sulL
vMlscellaneous
1lor precluslon purposes does noL maLLer whlch case ls flled flrsL buL whlch case ls den|ded flrsL
2led case can be precluded by sLaLe case
f1he Den||ne of Muua||
|Muua|| donr|ne lf a parLy was noL exposed Lo Lhe rlsk of belng bound by Lhe orlglnal case Lhen Lhey
were noL be allowed Lo preclude a parLy who could have been bound(motlvoteJ by foltoess)
||Cffenslve nonmuLual lssue precluslon When seeks Lo foreclose u from llLlgaLlng an lssue Lhe u has
prevlously llLlgaLed unsuccessfully ln an acLlon wlLh anoLher parLy
1Cours have broad d|snre|on |n app||ng CI
2lf l checkllsL saLlsfled courLs conslder kesaemens 29 fanors
Auld dellberaLely bypass opporLunlLy Lo parLlclpaLe ln orlglnal proceedlng?
|Could he have effecLed [olnder? Wan o preven wa|andsee p|a|n|ffs
uld u have sLrong lncenLlve Lo llLlgaLe prlor sulL?
|Were damages subsLanLlal? Were fuLure sulLs foreseeable?
CAre Lhere lnconslsLenL prlor [udgmenLs?
|lf rullngs evenly spllL cannoL use precluslon lf heavlly LllLed ln favor of parLy seeklng
precluslon may be allowed
Duoes Lhe subsequenL proceedlng afford more advanLageous procedural opporLunlLles?
3Pork/one arklane esLabllshed Lhe use of offenslve lssue precluslon ln federal cases and hence ended
Lhe use of Lhe muLuallLy docLrlne ln federal courLs
ACranLed Lrlal courLs broad dlscreLlon ln allowlng Cl
1ofony v N85 lmoqinq 5ystems 1ofany flled counLerclalm agalnsL n8S alleglng LhaL he was enLlLled
Lo reLlremenL plan beneflLs Pe Lhen flled a moLlon for parLlal S! based upon a federal dlsLrlcL courL
declslon by coworker !ames whlch esLabllshed exlsLence of penslon plaln MoLlon for parLlal S! was
denled b/c 1ofany was a walLandsee plalnLlff
APowever exLended lotklooe Lo ln sLaLe courL sub[ecL Lo falrness lncenLlve Lo llLlgaLe
lnconslsLenL [udgmenLs and procedural opporLunlLles crlLerla
|||uefenslve nonmuLual lssue precluslon When u seeks Lo prevenL rellLlgaLlng an lssue whlch was already
deLermlned ln an acLlon wlLh anoLher parLy CourLs wlll conslder
1Look aL usual checkllsL look aL 29 see above
28/onder1onque llrsL case where muLuallLy prlnclple was abandoned Cnly used ln a few sLaLes now
AnonmuLuallLy prevenLs rellLlgaLlon of lssues save u's Llme promoLes conslsLenL [udgmenLs
38ernhord v 8onk of 4merico and oLher beneflclarles ob[ecLed Lo seLLlemenL of decedenL's
accounL robaLe courL ruled LhaL funds 's decedenL aunL Lransferred Lo Cook's bank accounL shorLly
before her deaLh were a glfL
A Lhen sued bank as execuLor of aunL's wlll for allowlng unauLhorlzed wlLhdrawal of funds by
Cook She argued LhaL u was noL prlvy Lo prevlous acLlon nor was she so no muLuallLy
8ank successfully used defenslve nonmuLual l Cour re[ened muua|| no compelllng
reason Lo uphold Lhe docLrlne
CCourL also sald LhaL was prlvy Lo probaLe case slnce she represenLed Lhe same lnLeresLs ln
Lhe probaLe courL hearlng (noL necessary Lo [udgmenL)
g Inerssem ren|us|on (UC SS8)
|Def|n||on When courLs conslder Lhe effecLs of [udgmenLs rendered ouLslde Lhelr sysLem
||Genera| ru|e A [udgmenL musL be glven Lhe same precluslve effecL where presenLed for enforcemenL as lL
would have where rendered
1lnLersLaLe and fedfed precluslon based on Iu|| Ia|h Cred| C|ause of ConsLlLuLlon
Aln fed sysLem precluslon law of clrculL where [udgmenL presenLed conLrols
lor dlverslLy [udgmenLs precluslon law of sLaLe where fed courL slLs conLrols
2SLaLefed and fedsLaLe precluslon based on IIC Saue (28 uSC 1738)
3When pren|us|on |aws nonf||n mus use he |aw of he p|ane where he [udgmen was rendered o
deerm|ne he app||nab|e pren|us|ve effen (musL glve full falLh credlL)
CreaLer precluslon
ASCC1uS sald fed courL can'L glve greaLer precluslve effecL Lo sLaLe !M Lhan sLaLe would
A few sLaLes have glven greaLer precluslve effecL Lo slsLersLaLe !Ms (excepLlon Lo rule)
Clederal courLs are ln Lhe vanguard of Lhe movemenL Lo glve !Ms greaLer precluslve effecL so
would be rare for !M Lo have greaLer precluslve effecL ln sLaLe courL Lhan fed courL
|||Porker v noef/er
1 wlns [udgmenL for adulLery ln I1 courL
21hen seeks Lo enforce [udgmenL ln n? whlch does noL allow adulLery acLlon
3llC requlres n? courL Lo enforce Lhe [udgmenL
|vllC does noL apply Lo forelgn [udgmenLs buL uS more lncllned Lo recognlze Lhem Lhan vlce versa
18ule of comlLy We wlll recognlze forelgn [udgmenLs as an acL of goodwlll
2!udgmenLs from commonlaw counLrles mosL llkely Lo be recognlzed
3CounLrles more relucLanL Lo enforce our [udgmenLs b/c of procedural dlfferences
aMore emphasls on llve LesLlmony
bMore dlscovery
nkeep aLLorney fees where Lhey orlglnaLe
d8roader personal !u

CCMLLk LI1IGA1ICN
Arlses when you have more Lhan one clalm broughL by a slngle agalnsL a slngle u 8(a) auLhorlzes Lhese slmple clalms
!usLlflcaLlon 1) !udlclal economy seLLllng mulLlple lssues ln one lawsulL
2) Avoldlng subsLanLlve pre[udlce Lo an affecLed parLy
Complex llLlgaLlon preferable Lo separaLe cases as long as complexlLy does noL reach a Llpplng polnL where Lhe parLles
are obllgaLed Lo do Loo many Lhlngs aL once
1 INI1IAL ICINDLk CI CLAIMS AND CLAIMAN1S
aku|e 18 ICINDLk CI CLAIMS (UC 282) A parLy asserLlng a clalm counLerclalm crossclalm or 3
rd
parLy clalm
may [oln as many clalms as lL has agalnsL an opposlng parLy as lndependenL C8 alLernaLlve clalms
|Used when arLy has mulLlple clalms agalnsL same opponenL
1noLe LhaL courL may order separaLe Lrlals of clalms or lssues
||Goa| 1o llLlgaLe as many clalms as posslble ln Lhe flrsL sulL Lo avold delay and needless repeLlLlon
18ule ls almosL unresLrlcLed
|| kequ|remens SaLlsfy personal [urlsdlcLlon sub[ecL maLLer [urlsdlcLlon and venue
1l8C cannoL enlarge or dlmlnlsh Lhese Lypes of [urlsdlcLlon
2SM! derlves from ArLlcle lll of Lhe ConsLlLuLlon led courLs wlLhouL power unless
aSource of power can be locaLed ln ArLlcle lll Anu
bower has been broughL Lo llfe by Congress
3MosL common sLaLuLory sources 1lLle 28 1331 (general) + 1332 (dlverslLy)
1332 ulverslLy requlres
auomlclle lo Jlffeteot stotes A buslness ls consldered a clLlzen of Lhe sLaLe where lL ls
lncorporaLed Anu Lhe sLaLe where lLs prlmary place of buslness ls locaLed
bulvetslty most be obsolote nCnL of plalnLlffs can be from same sLaLe as An? of defendanLs
cAmooot 575k
b norris v 4very ermlLLed [olnder of clalms lf sufflclenLly relaLed CverLurned commonlaw prohlblLlon on [olnder
n kyder v lefferson note/ CourL denles [olnder of husband's and wlfe's clalms flndlng Lhey were severally wronged
and cannoL [oln Lhelr clalms ulssenL conslders Lhem more llke parLnershlp who suffered [olnL ln[ury
|||!olnL lnLeresL an lnLeresL shared by 2 or more people whlch ls undlfferenLlaLed
|vWould have won under 8ule 20
d ku|e 20 LkMISSIVL ICINDLk CI Ak1ILS (UC 287) 2pott test lalnLlffs may be [olned ln one acLlon ll
| 1hey asserL a rlghL Lo [olnL several or alLernaLlve rellef arlslng ouL of Lhe same LransacLlon or occurrence
1 Loglcal relaLlonshlp LesL (same as compulsory counLerclalm and crossclalm)
2 llexlble lnLerpreLaLlon faclllLaLes [olnder
|| Any quesLlon of law or facL common Lo all plalnLlffs wlll arlse ln Lhe acLlon
1 Lasler Lo saLlsfy only need one common quesLlon
e uefendanLs 8ule 20 applles Lo us as well lncludlng Lhose who are clalmed agalnsL alLernaLlvely 1esL ls same
g used when MulLlple s or us wlsh Lo ad[udlcaLe a common lssue for purposes of convenlence economy
h Coal of 8ule 20 !udlclal economy (Lrlal convenlence expedlLe seLLlemenL of dlspuLes prevenL mulLlple sulLs)
| AVCIDANCL CI ICINDLk 20(b) ermlsslve [olnder only operaLes aL Lhe pleadlng level arLles may seek a
separaLe Lrlal lf Lhey don'L wanL Lo be [olned w/ anoLher parLy Lo avold embarrassmenL delay expense or oLher
pre[udlce
|Lxample lf you wanL Lo dlsassoclaLe yourself from parLy w/bad publlc repuLaLlon le 8 afLer splll
||1he courL wlll also granL separaLe Lrlals lf [olnder would desLroy sub[ecL maLLer [urlsdlcLlon or pose venue
problems
[ ku|e 18 v ku|e 20 !olnder of parLles bears a greaLer burden of [usLlflcaLlon Lhan [olnder of clalms b/c Lhe
addlLlonal parLy brlngs wlLh Lhem a whole bundle of par preroga|ves 1hey can
|SeL Lhe boundarles of relevancy Lhrough pleadlngs
||uevelop facLs by dlscovery
|||llle Lhelr own moLlons
|vCall Lhelr own wlLnesses lnLroduce Lhelr own evldence
v8equesL Lhelr own [ury lnsLrucLlons
v|Appeal adverse [udgmenLs
ku|e 21 MISICINDLk of parLles ls noL grounds for dlsmlssal 1he courL may add or drop a parLy on lLs own or
sever any clalm agalnsL a parLy
| ku|e 2(a) lf acLlons before Lhe courL lnvolve a common quesLlon of law or facL Lhe courL may [oln for
hearlng or Lrlal any or all maLLers aL lssue ln Lhe acLlons or consolldaLe Lhe acLlons
|| ku|e 2(b) lor convenlence Lo avold pre[udlce or Lo expedlLe and economlze Lhe courL may order a
separaLe Lrlal of one or more separaLe lssues clalms crossclalms counLerclalms or 3
rd
parLy clalms
2 ADDING 1C 1nL CkIGINAL Ak1ILS CCMULSCk ICINDLk IMLLADLk AND IN1LkVLN1ICN
aku|e 19(a) kLUIkLD ICINDLk CI Ak1ILS (UC 290)
|Goa| Avold pre[udlce Lo a parLy or absenLee proLecL subsLanLlve rlghLs
1WanL Lo avold rlsk of Lhe JooblebloJ (as wlLh lmpleader)
2Secondary goal [udlclal economy reduclng delay needless repeLlLlon and expense
||1hreesLep process
1AbsenLee requlred Lo [oln? (19(a))
2leaslble Lo do [oln Lhem? (personal !u SM! venue)
3Should case go one lf noL feaslble? (19(b))
|||ku|e 19 #A person who ls sub[ecL Lo servlce of process and whose [olnder wlll noL deprlve Lhe courL of
sub[ecL maLLer [urlsdlcLlon musL be [olned as a parLy lf"
|v19(a) CnLCkLIS1
1CompleLe rellef cannoL be granLed ln LhaL person's absence Ck
AWould courL be obllged Lo granL lncompleLe rellef w/o Lhe parLy?
Would Lhe person's absence make furLher lawsulLs llkely?
2erson clalms an lnLeresL ln Lhe sub[ecL of Lhe acLlon such LhaL dlsposlng of Lhe acLlon w/o hlm wlll
Almpalr hls ablllLy Lo proLecL hls lnLeresL C8
Leave an exlsLlng parLy sub[ecL rlsk of mulLlple or lnconslsLenL llablllLy (sttooqest cose)
|kopopott ltovlJeot bank/lnsurance co mlghL have Lo pay same funds Lo 2 parLles
||u also wlshes Lo cosL of 2 Lrlals wlll counLer LhaL he should be able Lo plck hls us
v19(b) When [olnder noL feaslble courL wlll declde wheLher case may proceed by looklng aL
1Lqu| and good nonsn|enne es foctors o nons|der
ALxLenL Lo whlch [udgmenL rendered ln Lhelr absence mlghL pre[udlce Lhem or exlsLlng parLles
|us lotetest lo ovolJloq moltlple solts locooslsteot tellef ot sole tespooslblllty)
LxLenL Lo whlch pre[udlce could be lessened/avolded by shaplng Lhe rellef
CWheLher [udgmenL rendered ln person's absence would be adequaLe
|lobllc ooJ cootts lotetest lo complete ooJ efflcleot settlemeot of coottovetsles
DWheLher would have an adequaLe remedy lf Lhe acLlon were dlsmlssed for non[olnder
|otom cooslJetotloos
2ueLermlnaLlons are casespeclflc no hard and fasL rules
v|Provident 1rodesmens v Potterson lalnLlff's esLaLes seek declaraLory [udgmenL abouL wheLher Clancl had
uuLcher's permlsslon Lo drlve when accldenL occurred uuLcher seeks Lo [oln buL can'L b/c lL wlll desLroy
dlverslLy !u CourL decldes Lo proceed wlLhouL hlm
1uefendanL (Lumbermen's) lnLeresL uon'L wanL exposure Lo mulLlple llablllLy
APave Lo pay clalms agalnsL Cloncl b/c lL's found LhaL he had permlsslon
1hen plalnLlffs sue uuLcher for Lhe remalnder
CuuLcher would seek coverage from Lumbermens
Dlf 2
nd
rullng says Clancl dldn'L have permlsslon Lhen Lumbermens wlll have Lo pay Lwlce
|Cnce for Clancl once for uuLcher
LU1 plalnLlffs llmlLed damage clalm Lo$100k whlch ellmlnaLed Lhls posslblllLy
2CuLslder's lnLeresL uuLcher seeks Lo proLecL hls lnsurance funds from belng depleLed
APe wlll noL be bound by rullng buL does noL wanL Lo rellLlgaLe Lhe permlsslon lssue
3LfflclenL seLLlemenL Already spenL a loL of Llme and money aL Lrlal
's remedy lalnLlff's lnLeresL ln preservlng [udgmenL ouLwelghs oLher facLors
AMay noL have adequaLe remedy lf uuLcher [olned slnce subsLlLuLe forum noL avallable
v||rovldenL AlLernaLlve Pypo
112(b)(7) fallure Lo [oln a parLy under 8ule 19 (musL be lncluded ln answer)
2lf rovldenL broughL 12(b)(7) before Lrlal and 's dldn'L conflne Lhelr clalms Lo $100k case would have
been dlsmlssed wlLhouL pre[udlce
3lalnLlff could sLlll brlng clalm ln an alLernaLlve forum whlch could accommodaLe all parLles
v|||kopoport v 8onco Mexicono broughL sulL for reLurn of funds buL 4 parLles had rlval clalms Lo funds
CourL granLed 12(b)(7) b/c could noL [oln oLher parLles who were ln Mexlco
18apoporL has access Lo alLernaLlve forum ln Mexlco
2CLher clalmanLs would be pre[udlced by rullng ln Lhelr absence
3!udgmenL rendered would noL be adequaLe w/o access Lo wlLnesses and documenLs ln Mexlco
bku|e 1 IMLLADLk (UC 296)
|urpose
1Allows defendanL Lo brlng ln a 3
rd
parLy who ls or may be llable for all or parL of Lhe clalm agalnsL lL
Au Lhen becomes LhlrdparLy plalnLlff
moy or moy not amend complalnL Lo lnclude 3u per 14(a)
|Lven lf all l crlLerla saLlsfled may sLlll rellLlgaLe 14(a) Lrumps common law l
|| CnLCkLIS1
1 osofflcleot LhaL lmpleader clalm merely arose ouL of same LransacLlon as orlglnal clalm
lmpleader musL be der|va|ve or conLlngenL 3
rd
parLy seeks relmbursemenL lf Lhey have Lo pay
A Der|va|ve l am llable buL you are responslble for my llablllLy
No Der|va|ve l am noL llable ?ou are llable lnsLead
2 3
rd
parLy complalnL musL be broughL wlLhln 14 days of answer else courL musL granL leave
||| 1ypes of derlvaLlve llablllLy
1oJemolflcotloo one parLy seeks Lo hold anoLher parLy legally llable for damages
25obtoqotloo Lhe successlon of one person Lo Lhe rlghLs of anoLher (le lnsured subrogaLes hls rlghL
Lo sue negllgenL 3
rd
parLy afLer lnsurance co pald hls clalm)
3coottlbotloo 2 or more LorLfeasors are [olnLly or severally llable for Lhe same ln[ury
wottooty reLallers mlghL lmplead manufacLurers
|v Goa| revenL lnconslsLenL rullngs LhaL may resulL from lnablllLy Lo l sLranger Avold doubleblnd
1 MC8L lMC81An1 Lhan [udlclal economy concerns
Clmpleader doesn'L always resulL ln economy slnce 3
rd
parLy u has parLy prerogaLlves
2Avolds pre[udlce by prevenLlng rlsk of doub|eb|nd u ls llable Lo buL 3
rd
parLy ls noL lmpleaded so
noL lssue precluded lf u Lhen sues 3
rd
parLy ln second sulL and Lhey wln u ls ln Lhe doubleblnd Pe ls
llable Lo buL can'L be lndemnlfled
v Sandard n|gh| d|snre|onar CourLs balance [udlclal economy vs complexlLy concerns
1 CourLs unllkely Lo permlL lmpleader when u llkely Lo wln b/c lL sub[ecLs Lhe u Lo unnecessary expense
2 Also unllkely Lo granL lf lL wlll cause undue delay Lo Lhe u
3 lf lmpleadlng shallowpockeL parLy mlghL resulL ln smaller verdlcL for
lf Lhere ls a lack of slmllarlLy b/ lssues and evldence presenLed
v| Sandard of rev|ew MoLlon Lo lnLervene ls lnLerlocuLory order denlal/granLlng generally noL appealable
v|| Mo|on o sr|e 3u or oLher parLy may move Lo sLrlke u's lmpleader ln 2 ways
1 Argue LhaL lL's beyond scope of 8ule 14
2 Argue LhaL courL should use lLs dlscreLlon Lo refuse lmpleader even lf rule saLlsfled
v||| leub v 8/6 loods sued 8/C for servlng Lhem bad ham 8/C lmpleaded SwlfL Lhe provlder of Lhe ham
Lo lndemnlfy Lhemselves agalnsL any [udgmenL for
1noL necessary for [udgmenL Lo be enLered before lmpleadlng 3
rd
parLy
2lmpleader does nC1 allow u Lo redlrecL 's complalnL conLrols lL
A8/C would flrsL have Lo pay damages Lo !eub Lhen be relmbursed by SwlfL
3 Cnce 8/C lmpleaded SwlfL !eub coolJ bove amended complalnL Lo asserL clalm agalnsL SwlfL
A8eLLer Lo brlng separaLe sulL lncreases chance of wlnnlng and prevenLs use of ul
nku|e 2(a)(2) IN1LkVLN1ICN kIGn1 (UC 303) Means for ouLslders Lo make Lhemselves parLles (dlfferenL
from oLher [olnder devlces ln Lhls regard) Mandaor noL dlscreLlonary
|CnLCkLIS1
11lmely moLlon (may even be afLer Lrlal)
AWlll courL parLles suffer from delay?
|May sLraln resources of parLles or compllcaLe proceedlngs
Was delay reasonable?
|uld represenLaLlon prevlously seem adequaLe as ln 5mock?
2lnLeresL relaLlng Lo Lhe properLy or LransacLlon
3lnLeresL wlll be pracLlcally lmpalred by Lhe proceedlng
AlmpalrmenL serlous enough Lo enLlLle hlm Lo lnfluence ouLcome ln ways only llLlganL can?
|need noL be capable of blndlng hlm
||SomeLlmes stote Jeclsls ls enough (esp ln cases of 1
sL
lmpresslon no blndlng auLhorlLy)
|||8epuLaLlonal harm
LxlsLlng parLles do noL adequaLely represenL lnLeresL
AlnLeresLs do noL have Lo be adverse [usL dlsslmllar
|Was appllcanL's sLake greaLer Lhan LhaL of exlsLlng parLy allgned w/hlm?
||ls exlsLlng parLy ln colluslon wlLh an opposlng parLy? lncompeLenL? hosLlle?
8urden ls on Lhose opposlng lnLervenLlon Lo show adequaLe represenLaLlon
SMusL flle a propose pleadlng along wlLh moLlon Lo lnLervene
||Goa| roLecLs subsLanLlve rlghLs uon'L wanL Lo lmpalr parLy's ablllLy Lo proLecL lnLeresL
|||Sandard of kev|ew
1MosL f courLs regard lssues of pracLlcal lmpalrmenL and represenLaLlon as revlewable
Aooket however sLaLed LhaL denlals of lnLervenLlon were revlewed for abuse of dlscreLlon
2uenlals based on unLlmellness wlll be revlewed only for abuse of dlscreLlon
|vGenera|
1lnLervener Lakes case as he flnds lL LaLer he lnLervenes fewer opporLunlLles Lo lnfluence ouLcome
v5muck v nobson 1rlal courL sLrlkes down school board's plan orders uC schools Lo desegregaLe 8oard
does noL appeal parenLs and 2 board members do 8oard members can'L lnLervene one reslgned so had no
appealable lnLeresL Lhe oLher can'L appeal as an lndlvldual 8uL parenLs CAn
1loteots lotetest ls lmpolteJ lf lnLervene now can prevenL desegregaLlon from Laklng place
Alf Lhey can'L wlll have helghLened burden of proof desegregaLlon plan ls unconsLlLuLlonal
2otetest oot oJepootely tepteseoteJ 1here was fallure of represenLaLlon school board dldn'L appeal
A Lven lf Lhey had Lhey represenLs all klds whereas parenLs' lnLeresLs narrower
31lmely uldn'L know school board wasn'L golng Lo appeal unLll afLer declslon was flnal
AnoL asklng for more dlscovery addlLlonal evldence or crossexamlnaLlon so noL pre[dulclal
Slnce lnLervenLlon ls laLe [udge can lmpose condlLlons 1ake Lhe case as lL ls"
v|ClLy of 8osLon Shreve's sulL agalnsL landlord reslsLlng renL conLrol
1lnLeresL of all 8osLon resldenLs were more dlffuse Lhan LhaL of hls lndlgenL cllenLs
dku|e 2(b) LkMISSIVL IN1LkVLN1ICN (UC 30S) CourL welghs [udlclal economy vs excesslve complexlLy
|Used when Advances Lhe lnLeresL of Lhe appllcanL and Lhe courL ln more cosLefflclenL llLlgaLlon
||n|gh| d|snre|onar even lf requlremenLs meL courL may refuse
1lnsulaLed from revlew by Lrlal courL's dlscreLlon
|||CnLCkLIS1
11lmely moLlon
2Clalm or defense LhaL shares common quesLlon of law or facL
3no undue pre[udlce or delay Lo exlsLlng parLles (dlscreLlonary)
Auoes lL serve [udlclal economy?
|uo savlngs of parLy [udlclal resources from avoldlng exLra lawsulL ouLwelgh cosLs from
added presence of Lhe lnLervener?
Wlll lL lnLerfere w/rlghLs or delay Lhe orlglnal parLles?
|lnLervenLlon forces exlsLlng parLy Lo rellnqulsh parLlal managemenL of case
||lnLervener may compllcaLe exlsLlng parLles' preparaLlon and llLlgaLlon vla parLy prerogs
|||CompllcaLlons from lnLervenLlon may sLraln resources of orlglnal parLles so LhaL Lhelr
conLlnued ablllLy Lo parLlclpaLe ls [eopardlzed forum becomes less accesslble
|vCase could become Loo burdensome
vlnLervener mlghL block seLLlemenL
|vGoa| 1o promoLe [udlclal economy
v5to//worth ermlsslve lnLervenLlon aL [udge's dlscreLlon lnLervenLlon can be laLe lf no pre[udlce resulLs
v|nooker !udge lrlendly seeks Lo ellmlnaLe dlsLlncLlon b/L lnLervenLlon by rlghL and permlsslve lnLervenLlon
1noL falLhful Lo LexL of Lhe rule lotetveotloo by tlqbt ls oot Jlsctetloooty
3CCUN1LkCLAIMS AND CkCSSCLAIMS
aDef|n||ons
|CounLerclalm When a parLy clalms agalnsL one who prevlously clalmed agalnsL hlm
||Crossclalm When a parLy clalms agalnsL a coparLy (raLher Lhan an opposlng parLy)
bCounern|a|ms genera|
|Scope for counLerclalms ls unllmlLed (llke 8ule 18 clalm [olnder)
||no guaranLee LhaL counLerclalm wlll be ad[udlcaLed aL same Llme or aL all (musL meeL venue SM!)
nku|e 13(a) CCMULSCk CCUN1LkCLAIM (UC 283) A pleadlng MuS1 sLaLe as a counLerclalm any clalm
LhaL aL Lhe Llme of servlce Lhe pleader has agalnsL Lhe opposlng parLy lf Lhe clalm
|Arlses ouL of Lhe LransacLlon or occurrence LhaL ls Lhe sub[ecL of Lhe clalm
1oqlcol telotloosblp LesL
||uoes noL requlre addlng anoLher parLy over whom Lhe courL does noL have !u
dCompulsory counLerclalm ls funcLlon equlvalenL of clalm precluslon ?Cu WlLL LCSL l1 ll ?Cu uCn'1 MAkL l1
eku|e 13(b) LkMISSIVL CCUN1LkCLAIM (UC 283) AnyLhlng LhaL doesn'L fall under 13(a)
|Confers advanLage ln realm of precluslon law
||May plead lL or reserve lL for fuLure llLglaLlon
fku|e 13(g) CkCSSCLAIM AGAINS1 A CCAk1 (UC 286) A pleadlng MA? sLaLe as a crossclalm lf Lhe clalm
|Arlses ouL of Lhe LransacLlon/occurrence C8 properLy LhaL ls Lhe sub[ecL of Lhe clalm
1oqlcol telotloosblp LesL LsLabllsh llnk b/L your clalm and clalm LhaL ls already securely ln Lhe case
||MA? lnclude a clalm LhaL coparLy ls llable for parL of clalm agalnsL clalmanL
1ln Lhls sense provldes [olnder mechanlsm for derlvaLlve clalms (lmpleader ls equlvalenL for ouLslders)
2Crossclalms are never compulsory llke permlsslve counLerclalms
g-ote LhaL a response Lo a crossclalm ls a compulsory counLerclalm
IN1LkLLADLk ku|e 22 and 1||e 28 133S A mechanlsm Lo brlng all defendanLs ln a case lnLo Lhe same acLlon
Pelps Lo clear Lhe alr ln one proceedlng
aUsed when uefendanL seeks Lo [oln ln a slngle sulL Lwo or more persons asserLlng muLually excluslve clalms Lo
money or properLy
bGoa| 1o prevenL mulLlple llablllLy lnconslsLenL [udgmenLs or vexaLlous mulLlple lawsulLs
n2 sages (afLer sLakeholder deposlLs properLy/money w/courL LhaL ls sub[ecL of clalms)
|CourL deLermlnes wheLher lnLerpleader ls approprlaLe on Lhe facLs of Lhe case
1ulslotetesteJ sLakeholder only parLlclpaLes ln SLage 1
||1he courL ad[udlcaLes Lhe adverse clalms and dlsLrlbuLes Lhe sLake
1otetesteJ sLakeholder parLlclpaLes ln SLage 2 also compeLlng w/ rlval clalmanLs for fund
dCnLCkLIS1
|ulverslLy requlremenL llnd 2 clalmanLs wlLh clalms agalnsL Lhe u who are from dlfferenL [urlsdlcLlons
||Clalms musL relaLe Lo same properLy
|||roperLy musL be worLh more Lhan $300
eCourL can do remarkable Lhlngs
|naLlonwlde servlce of process
||Ln[oln people from sulng Lhe defendanL
f5tote lorm v 1oshire ulsLrlcL courL goL carrled away sald everyone lnvolved ln accldenL can be lnLerpleaded
|Supreme CL sald only Lhose wlLh clalms agalnsL SLaLe larm can be lnLerpleaded
||Clalms agalnsL Creyhound and lndlvldual drlvers musL be broughL separaLely
SCLASS AC1ICNS ku|e 23 A deslgnaLed parLy llLlgaLes noL only for hlmself buL also as a represenLaLlve of a group
aGenera|
|laclllLaLe ad[udlcaLlon of addlLlonal clalms wlLhouL enlarglng number of acLlve parLles
1no llmlL on number of parLles unllke 8ule 20 (permlsslve [olnder)
||8lnds all class members even Lhose who are noL parLy Lo Lhe sulL
|||Class members are passlve unless Lhey exclude Lhemselves or sLep forward
bGoa| of ku|e 23 1o promoLe [udlclal economy
|8uL lL has acLually had Lhe opposlte effecL lL makes lawsulLs posslble LhaL would noL oLherwlse be posslble
(pr|vae aornesgenera|)
||le Llsen clalm was noL leglLlmaLe by lLself
nCnLCkLIS1 (23(a)) musL meeL all 6 of Lhese
|Numeros| 1he class ls so numerous LhaL [olnder of all members ls lmpracLlcal (undeflned llmlL)
||Commona|| 1here are quesLlons of law or facL common Lo Lhe class
|||1p|na|| Clalms or defenses of represenLaLlve parLles are Lyplcal of Lhe class
|vAdequan of kepresena|on 8epresenLaLlve parLles wlll falrly and adequaLely proLecL class lnLeresLs
ALLorney ls quallfled experlenced able Lo conducL proposed llLlgaLlon"
v&&C|ass mus a|so be suff|n|en| def|n|e
1arLles musL know whaL ls belng llLlgaLed courL needs Lo know consequences of [udgmenL and u
needs noLlce
2lf class deflnlLlon ls vague oLher parLles wlll Lry Lo collaLerally aLLack and rellLlgaLe
v|8epresenLaLlve musL be a member of Lhe class
dAND musL meeL one of Lhe followlng 23(b)
|rosecuLlng separaLe acLlons would adversely lmpacL opponenLs or absenL members (rare)
||ln[uncLlve or declaraLory rellef ls approprlaLe for Lhe class (rare) C8
|||;uesLlons of law or facL common Lo class members predomlnaLe over any quesLlons affecLlng lndlvldual
members Anu class acLlon ls mosL falr + efflclenL meLhod of ad[udlcaLlon lacLors
1Class members' lnLeresL ln lndlvldually conLrolllng prosecuLlon/defense of separaLe acLlons
2LxLenL of exlsLlng llLlgaLlon lnvolvlng class members
3ueslrablllLy of Lhe forum
Llkely dlfflculLles ln managlng a class acLlon
|v(b)(|||) ls mosL common
1No usefu| for |arge damages b/c plalnLlffs wlll wanL Lo llLlgaLe separaLely
2usually appllcable where lndlvldual damage clalms noL large enough Lo warranL lndlvldual sulLs
dCo||aera| aan An argumenL LhaL a [udgmenL LhaL has become flnal ls noL enforceable agalnsL you
Can make on Lwo grounds
1Lack of personal [urlsdlcLlon (ooesbetty)
2Lack of adequaLe noLlce (,ollooe)
eAdequae kepresena|on
|nonsberry v Lee Lee broughL class acLlon Lo enforce raclally resLrlcLlve covenanL on behalf of landowners ln
cerLaln area Pansberry who boughL land from a slgner of Lhe covenanL broughL sulL Lo challenge enforcemenL
slnce Lhe requlslLe 93 dldn'L slgn
1's due process vlolaLed cannoL deny someone properLy w/o chance Lo adequaLely proLecL Lhelr
lnLeresLs
2S|nne h|s |neress were no adequae| represened |n he f|rs su| he nanno be bound 1he
orlglnal parLles dld noL adequaLely proLecL Pansberry's lnLeresLs
32 nomponens o adequae represena|on
AMusL represenL oLhers' lnLeresLs Lo Lhe same exLenL he represenLs hls own
MusL have Lhe same ob[ecLlve of Lhe class members he seeks Lo represenL
|wren lnmaLes peLlLloned for ln[uncLlon Lo prevenL desegregaLlon of prlsons under 23(b)(2) 1hey were lssue
precluded by a prlor class acLlon sulL broughL by lnmaLes seeklng 1C desegregaLe prlsons
fAdequan of No|ne
|Mu//one v centro/ nonover 8onk 1rust
1"A fundamenLal requlremenL of due process ln any proceedlng whlch ls Lo be accorded flnallLy ls
noLlce reasonably calculaLed under Lhe clrcumsLances Lo apprlse lnLeresLed parLles of Lhe pendency of
Lhe acLlon and afford Lhem an opporLunlLy Lo presenL Lhelr ob[ecLlons"
21he noLlce musL reasonably convey Lhe requlred lnformaLlon and afford a reasonable Llme for Lhose
lnLeresLed Lo make Lhelr appearance"
||Leve|s of no|ne requ|remen
1names addresses unknowable ubllcaLlon
2names addresses unknown buL knowable aL greaL expense ubllcaLlon
3names addresses known Servlce by mall (Lo all)
|||No|ne ?ou musL glve Lhe besL posslble noLlce you can under Lhe clrcumsLances Adequacy of
represenLaLlon ls nLIL8 an excuse for falllng Lo glve Lhe besL posslble noLlce LhaL ls feaslble
gku|e 23 No|ne kequ|remens
|isen Llsen sued oddloL brokers for overcharglng commlsslons Pls lndlvldual damages were small buL
agreed Lo serve as class represenLaLlve SaLlsfled prerequlslLes of 23(a) and 23(b)(3) CourL addresses
23(c)(2) noLlce requlremenLs
||SCC1uS sald mus g|ve |nd|v|dua| no|ne |f a|| n|ass members nan be |den|f|ed w]reasonab|e effor
oLherwlse due process ls vlolaLed
1uefendanL provlded a llsL of names/addresses Lo Lo make noLlce more expenslve
2MusL geL prellmlnary ln[uncLlon on merlLs of clalm before orderlng u Lo pay noLlce cosLs
hI|u|d kenover
|lf unclalmed funds from class acLlon seLLlemenL remaln dlsLrlbuLe Lhem for common beneflL of Lhe class
1le overcharglng cabbles courL made Lhem glve free Lax rldes unLll Lhe depleLed remalnder of
damage fund
2le s harmed by cerLaln medlclne unclalmed funds allocaLed for research purposes
||Some !us allow some don'L








Chen||s
1) 8ead Lhe quesLlon Lwlce
2) WrlLe down Lhe parLles clalms and [urlsdlcLlonal rules
3) CuLllne your answer
a Answer ln Lhe order he asks you Lo
b no lnLro/conclusory paragraph needed
n SLrucLure Lhe argumenL loglcally
d ldenLlfy lssues LhaL don'L merlL dlscusslon lssues whlch can be handled qulckly and lssues merlLlng
lengLhler dlscusslon
) SLaLe clearly your concluslon
S) Lxplaln why your concluslon ls correcL
a 8ase your explanaLlon ln Lhe rule
l Walk Lhrough Lhe rule sLepbysLep
b Weave facLs lnLo explanaLlon don'L [usL sLaLe Lhe law
n keep lL slmple don'L spend much Llme on Lhlngs we dldn'L Lalk abouL ln class






















;uallLles of Lxams
1) Conclusory handllng someLhlng ln a conclusory way ?ou need Lo develop your argumenL
2) !udgmenL unpersuaslve uon'L agree wlLh concluslon
3) 8alance MlghL agree w/concluslon buL analysls ls oneslded
a See maLLers whlch can be handled qulckly and ones whlch merlL lengLhler dlscusslon
4) no CoL lL wrong
3) ConfllcL Sald lL one way laLer on sald lL anoLher
6) Crg CrganlzaLlon lalled Lo follow lnsLrucLlons
a ?ou need Lo Lake Lhe Llme Lo organlze
7) locus Pard Lo see whaL's golng on ln your answer
8) ueLached Lapsed lnLo black leLLer answer w/o regard Lo facLs
9) 8esLaLemenL !usL resLaLlng Lhe llne
8e opporLunlsLlc buL Lake Lhe Llme Lo Lhlnk abouL your answer We're belng LesLed on whaL we know buL also on our
[udgmenL of whaL noL Lo Lalk abouL