Civil Procedure Exam Outline:
McKenna, Fall 2016
Introduction
Courts
Federal Civil Litigation
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Federal Question Jurisdiction
Introduction
Well-Pleaded Complaint Rule
Diversity Jurisdiction
Introduction
Individual Citizenship and the Domicile Test
Complete Diversity Requirement
Corporate Citizenship
Amount-in-Controversy Requirement
Constitutional Scope of Diversity
Removal Jurisdiction
Personal Jurisdiction
History, Foundation, Problems
Modern Approach
Specific Personal Jurisdiction
Defining Contacts
Stream of Commerce
“Arising out of” Requirement
Internet Challenges
General Personal Jurisdiction
In Rem and Quasi in Rem Jurisdiction
Transient Presence and Consent
Long Arm Statutes
Notice and Service of Process
Venue
Basic Venue
Dismissals and Transfers
Pleading
Basic Pleading
Responding to the Complaint
Rule 11
Amending Pleadings
Joinder, Counterclaims and Crossclaims
Discovery
Expert Witnesses
Written Discovery Requests; Depositions; IMEs; ESI
Discovery Abuse & Control
Introduction
A. Courts:
Three requirements before choosing a court: Subject Matter (federal or state court?), Personal Jurisdiction (jurisdiction over the parties?), and Venue (appropriate court within the jurisdiction?).
Article III created the dual court system of federal and state courts.
Section 1- Federal
Section 2- State
Structure of State Court Systems:
Courts of “original jurisdiction” are also known as trial courts.
Commencing litigation- Plaintiff files a complaint
Defendant submits an answer
Parties develop fact and defenses through discovery
A final judgement is entered for the winning party
State courts can hear just about any case, except the limited cases explicitly given to federal courts via statute.
B. Structure of Federal Court Systems:
Section 1 creates the supreme court.
Congress created lesser courts so all trial cases would begin in state courts.
Federal district courts are “original jurisdiction”, then court of appeals and then supreme court.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction of Federal Courts:
9 types: 1. Ambassadors, Ministers, Consuls 2. Admiralty, Maritime 3. US as a party 4. Two or more states 5. State and Citizens 6. Citizens and other states 7. Citizens of the same state claiming lands of another 8. Between a state and foreign states
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
A. Federal Question Jurisdiction
28 U.S.C. §1331: The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.
Article III Section II.
The Holmes Test- A suit arises under the law that creates the cause of action (the creation test)
Case must involve a “federal ingredient”, as long as the original cause involves a question of federal law.
The Well Pleaded Complaint Rule
Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Mottley (1908): Sued by Mottley for passes that were based on a state contract. Mottley claimed 5th amendment deprivation in an answer, but were denied. Established that analysis must be focused on the allegations in the plaintiff’s complaint (i.e. cause of action), not potential defenses the defendant may assert in the answer.
A claim arises under federal law only when the plaintiff’s statement of his own cause of action shows that it is based upon federal law.
Well pleaded complaint rule- The issue that appears on the face of the well-plea
that for purposes of diversity Hertz was a NJ citizen and the diversity requirement was met.
Nerve Center Test
Entities that are non-corporate are treated differently. They are citizens of every state that their partners are individually domiciled.
Amount in Controversy Requirement: Determined at the time the complaint is filed, not how much is recovered.
The St. Paul Mercury Test- Plaintiff’s claim for relief, if made in good faith, satisfies the amount in controversy requirement.
Diefenthal v. C.A.B. (1982): Denied from sitting in smoking section. Claimed they were treated brusquely, and caused extreme embarrassment. Dismissed because they cannot conceivably believe that the damages are worth over $10,000 and they had claimed $50,000 each. Argued it was in good faith, but the court disagreed.
Even with good faith, there must be an evidentiary basis.
Allegations are usually accepted unless there is a clear legal certainty that the amount cannot be recovered.
Aggregation of Claims to meet the amount in the controversy requirement
Single P v Single D (typically allowed): Can aggregate claims even if unrelated to meet the requirement.
Multiple Parties (typically not allowed among parties): Every tub must float on its own. None of them exceed 75K by themselves, but exceed $75,000 together (usually not allowed).
However, if one is over $75,000 and then co-plaintiff is added on the same case, it is okay.
