Select Page

Civil Procedure I
Temple University School of Law
Green, Craig

Civil Procedure


Spring 2014

I. Notice

Mulane v. Central Hanover Bank-199- in order to achieve economies of managing trusts Central Hanover establishes a common trust with 113 participants. Pursuant to NY statute they notify each person who’s address they had by mail to inform them. After 12 months and then every 3 years thereafter there is a “judicial settlement” which is the court signing off on the banks satisfactory completion of fiduciary responsibility (if you think they were negligent THIS IS YOUR ONLY CHANCE). NY Statue only requires the notice for these proceedings to be newspaper publication setting forth the company name, name and date of trust, and list of participating estates/trusts. COURT HOLDS THE NOTICE REQUIRED BY NY STATUTE IS INSUFFICIENT under the 14th amendment (due process before deprivation of property). * Interest of the state to settle its business must balance the 14th amendment concern for deprivation manifest in getting notice

· COURT LANDS ON THE MULANE REASONABILITY TEST- notice must be reasonably calculated to apprise interested parties and afford them opportunity to present objections

· Must be more than just a gesture (like complying with statutory minimum)- must be desirous of actually informing the absentee- OR where conditions do not permit a test that would hit this threshold the notice method must not be substantially less likely to bring home notice than other feasible substitutes

· Publication is only acceptable as a supplemental means

·For those whose address is not known, it’s ok b/c it’s the best we got

· For those with known names, c’mon, HOW are you gonna say that publication is reasonably designed to actually communicate when you got their address and can use mail?

· The court is not requiring THE BEST (personal service) to everyone, just one which is reasonably calculated

Rule 4 Governs Notice – 5 common methods were (1) personal delivery of summons (2) leaving copies at dwelling or place of abode with person of suitable age (3) delivering to an agent authorized to receive (4) any service that comports with state law where fed district is (5) any service that comports w/ state law where defendant lives

Wyman v. Newhouse-237 woman tricks a man to come from NY to FL b/c her mother is dying. Once there he gets served with process by Sheriff on the runway. When she tries to sue in Fed court, the federal court rules in favor of the man saying a “Fraud affecting the jurisdiction is equivalent to a lack of jurisdiction”

II. Opportunity to be Heard (pre-deprivation)

1. Right to be heard is needed to

a. minimize substantively unfair or mistaken deprivations of property

b. We place a high value on persons right to enjoy what is his free of government interference

i. Property has this sort of special quality where we don’t want it to just be able to be taken away from people in this country BECAUSE THE SYSTEM RESTS ON KNOWING THAT PROPERTY IS SECURE

1. The “experience” of property, the “feeling” of property

c. Also, property can be a value generating item so we don’t want to take it away from people because it can lead to more economic waste from consequential damages

d. Inherent sense of fairness dictates that taking without a chance to defend yourself is unfair

e. The law system feels a little difference when you at least have the opportunity to defend yourself instead of a KAFKA esque THE TRIAL situation

Fuentes v. Shevin- 240- a home appliance K allows seller to hold title until all payments are made and repossess if necessary. Seller gets writ of replevin under FL statute that only requires a complaint to be filed and a security bond be posted in case seller loses in court (some states don’t even require you to file a complaint meaning D may never get chance to be heard). Court holds that neither the BOND does not protect against an arbitrary taking of property. It is irrelevant that they didn’t have FULL TITLE (still making payments) b/c the 14th amend protects against deprivation of any interest in property. Grace periods to request property back and bonds don’t remedy 14th amend b/c the interference w/ property has already occurred AND an adversarial law system DEPENDS on havin

strikes down WI pre judgment wage garnishment procedure – policy rationalization that garnishments led to employees being terminated sometimes AND debt collectors have huge leverage anyway

Personal Jurisdiction

4 different scenarios (imagine on x and y axis)

1. Forum, Defendants, and Actions all in the same place- KNOWN AS EASY CASE- well never see it

2. Forum/Defendant are in state, but the actions outside- KNOWN AS GENERAL PERSONAL JURSIDICTION

a. QUESTION IS do I have enough DEEP PERSONAL ROOTS in the forum state to allow jurisdiction for things I did out of state- GOODYEAR WAS THE ONLY GENERAL JURSIDICTION CASE

3. Forum and Actions are in State, defendant is out of state- KNOWN AS SPECIFIC PERSONAL JURISDI.

a. Involves long arm statute grabbing out of state resident and bringing them back in


4. Forum, Defendant, and Actions are all in different areas


Exam- 2 step process- remember to consider specific v. general

1. Review long arm statute (this is distinct from constitutional test of minimum contacts)

2. Review constitutionality (minimum contacts) of the long arm statute

a. International shoe test- min contacts and reasonable

i. Find case law that is on point with the fact pattern

1) GENERAL JURISDICTION- deep roots- only Goodyear

2) Specific jurisdiction – EVERY OTHER CASE- it’s specific unless defendant is in their home state for this class

ALWAYS REVIEW THE WORDING OF THE LONG ARM STATUTE- some are written slopily (statutes can say whatever the state decides to make it) and others specifically cite “in accordance with the US constitution”