Civil Procedure – Rhodes
General Overview
I. Overlaying Policy
A. Promotion of fairness
1. Independent judiciary
B. Promotion of efficiency
1. If justice comes 25 years after the cause of action, it isn’t very helpful
II. Class objective
A. Manipulation: learn how to manipulate the rules to gain a desired objective.
III.Differences in Courts
A. Federal v. State
1. Federal courts move trials along
2. Federal courts require a unanimous verdict
IV.The Anatomy of a lawsuit
A. Cause of Action occurs
B. The attorney/client relationship begins
1. The client approaches an attorney
2. The attorney does a factual investigation
a. Ask for any documentation
i. Signed releases
ii. Medical records
iii. Statements
b. Ask for the state of the plaintiff (high, drunk, insane)
c. Search for any similar cases (punitive damages)
d. Make sure the possible defendants are solvent.
3. The attorney should also do a substantive investigation (look for a cause of action).
C. Choice of court (assuming judicial resolution is required).
1. Territorial Jurisdiction – a courts authority to engage in binding adjudiction over a person or a thing.
2. Subject Matter Jurisdiction
a. A court’s authority to adjudicate particular types of cases
b. States have virtually unlimited jurisdiction
c. Federal courts have limited jurisdiction
i. District courts may only try where there is diversity jurisdiction or federal question jurisdiction
3. Venue
D. Challenges to choice of court
1. Lack of TJ
2. Lack of SMJ
3. Lack of Venue
4. Removal
5. Transfer under §1404
6. Forum Non Conveniens
E. Choice of Law
1. If suit is filed in a state court, a state’s choice of law rules will apply.
2. Erie:
a. If a federal practice is different from a state practice, use Erie to determine which practice to choose.
F. Pleadings
1. Complaint
2. Answer
3. Possible Joinder
a. Supplemental Jurisdiction
G. Pretrial
1. Discovery
2. Dismissals and Privileges
3. Summary Judgment
H. The Jury
1. Right to jury trial
2. The Province of a Jury
a. Judgment as a matter of law
I. Finality of Judgments and Resolution
1. Res Judicata
2. Collateral Estoppel
3. Interstate and Interjurisdictional Preclusion
4. Other Restitution facts
a. 2/3 of cases are settled
b. Other 30% is handled by dismissals and Summary Judgments
c. Only 2% are tried by a jury.
The Proper Court
I. Territorial Jurisdiction
A. General Information
1. Territorial jurisdiction is limited by due process of the law.
a. Just because one injures another in a state does not give the state jurisdiction over the injurer.
2. Adequate connection requirement:
a. There must be an adequate connection between the defendant and the state.
b. First mentioned in Pennoyer v. Neff
3. Attached property must be attached at the beginning of the action so that the court knows it has jurisdiction
a. If the court attaches property at the end of the adjudication, Quasi In Rem Type 2, because it had no jurisdiction at the beginning of the action, it cannot
B. The Historical Formula
1. Pennoyer v. Neff (Mitchell sued Neff for legal fees, won, attached land, sold land to Pennoyer and Neff sued Pennoyer).
a. Prior to Pennoyer v. Neff, states had their own set of laws preventing them from gaining jurisdiction over a group of people.
b. After Pennoyer, a set of laws based on the constitution allowed/prevented states to/from entering in to binding adjudication in certain circumstances.
2. Types of actions:
a. In personum –
i. Under Pennoyer (there was a divorce exception – one could not just flee to be free from divorce – and a business exception), the actual physical presence of a defendant was required. In 1917, a person could be a resident of a state.
¨ Implied consent statues stretched the concept of waiving territorial jurisdiction – by acting in a state, you consent to being sued in a state. Acting includes:
Þ Driving
Þ Construct
law.
iv. The standard is fair because a state has a manifest interest in providing its residents with a convenient forum and if a defendant’s actions create a claim in the forum, the state should have jurisdiction.
v. Advances in modern transportation make it less unfair to litigate in a foreign forum.
c. Contracts – Burger King
i. Negotiations
¨ Where did the negotiations take place?
ii. Contemplated Consequences
¨ What did the parties believe would be the consequences if the action was brought to court?
¨ Did the parties think about being held to binding adjudication in a particular forum?
iii. Terms of the Contract
¨ What does the agreement say about where to hold trial, etc.?
iv. Course of Dealing
¨ Did the parties conform with the terms of the agreement?
v. Substantial connection
¨ Was there a connection between the actions of the contract and the forum?
vi. Because Rudzewicz negotiated through mail to Florida, contemplated the consequences of the terms of the contract (availing himself to Florida Law if he signed), agreed to make payments into Florida (Substantial connection), and did, in fact, send those payments to Florida, there was a substantial connection to Florida.
d. Market – World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson
i. Volkswagen dealerships that help World-Wide and Seaway sell vehicles in Oklahoma do not establish substantial connections for World-Wide and Seaway.
ii. One must serve the market of the forum.
¨ One serves the market by putting goods or services in the market.
Þ Selling a car in NJ is not equivalent to selling a car in OK.
Þ Putting product into the stream of commerce with the expectation that the good will be sold in a particular state does establish contacts if (Asahi plurality opinion – O’Connor test):
a. The product is designed for the state
b. The product is advertised for in the state,
c. There are customer service numbers in the state.
d. Followed by TX state courts.
Þ Awareness test (Brennan test in Asahi)
a. Awareness that the product is being sold in the forum creates jurisdiction.
b. Followed by TX Fed. Courts.
e. Effects – Calder v. Jones
