Civil Procedure I Outline

Professor Young – Fall 2010– Civil Procedure I Outline
Subject Matter Jurisdiction: (federal or state courts) The court’s power to hear a case because of the nature of the dispute; cannot be waived
        A.            Original Jurisdiction (it begins in federal trial court): A court’s power to hear and decide a                                                    matter before any other court can review the matter. Federal Courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. If it does                        not satisfy the federal question jurisdiction – it goes to state court
                        Federal Question(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. The Federal power over claims                                   arising under the U.S. Constitution, an act of Congress or a Treaty. 
                                        a. Created by:
                                                        i. Laws of the U.S. (USC)
                    ii. Constitution Article III of the U.S. Constitution
        §1 – Judicial power of US is vested in one Supreme Court and gives Congress      power to                     establish and ordain lower courts            
        §2 – Federal Judicial Authority extends to all cases arising under the Constitution, Treaties,                   and controversies between two or more states. Created by: Article III §2 of the U.S.                                     Constitution: Jurisdiction under the arising under statute must be based on the plaintiffs              claim
                                                        iii. Federal Treatises
                                        b. By:
                                                        i. Providing a remedy
                                                        ii. Has to be interpreted
                                                        iii. Fulfilling a policy – little iffy – not invoked very often
                                        c. Or federal issue: [example in Grable]                                                         i.   substantial- a federal court may exercise jurisdiction over a non-federal claim if the claim                                                       raises the interest of the federal system such that the claim is necessary, substantial,                                                                  disputed, stated in the complaint, and does not upset the balance of power between state                                                         and federal courts. [Grable- a “arising under” substantial federal issue that was brought up                                                             by P and it does not upset balance]                                                         ii. raised in plaintiff complaint
                                                        iii. contested by the parties
                                                        iv. would not upset the balance between state and federal
                                        d. Needs to be in plaintiff’s well pleaded complaint- A complaint that contains the                                                                       federal cause of action in the four corners of the complaint. [Mottley- this case got dismissed to state                                  court because plaintiff needs to bring up the issue.] i. Well Pleaded Complaint: Jurisdiction under §1331 must be determined from what necessarily appears in the plaintiffs’ statement of his claim. [Mottley] this rule asks whether the federal element is necessary to plaintiffs case
ii. A suit arises under the law that creates the cause of action [Holmes Creation Test] 1.     If the cause of action was created by the Law, US Constitution, or Treaties of the United States, then it arises under it
a.     The cause of action has a remedy that is expressly granted in the law of the Constitution of US (federal law)
b.     The Plaintiff has assert a claim that directly interpretation of the act (construction of federal law)
c.     Require the interpretation of a particular policy/act/treaty of the United States [Harms]  
This is a federal question automatically: Patents, plant variety protection, copyrights,                                                                              mask works, trademarks and unfair competition 28 U.S.C. §1338:
        Diversity Jurisdiction: 28 U.S.C. §1332: Is the power of the court to hear cases between citizens of different                         states when the amount in controversy exceeds $75K. Ps and Ds from different states and the claim must be                         more than $75K than the court can access jurisdiction this way. District Courts have Original Jurisdiction of                               all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds 75K and is between
                                        (a): The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in                                                  controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75K, exclusive of interest and costs, and is                                                          between-
                                                        (1) Citizen of Different States
        (2) Citizen of a State and citizens or subject of a Foreign State
        (3) Citizen of Different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are                          additional parties
        (4) A Foreign State, as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States
b.     Court can raise sua sponte any matter relating to subject matter jurisdiction
c.     AFA Tours v Whitchurch
i. Defendant must establish that it is a legal certainty that the damages claimed are too much
d.     Court must give a reasonable and appropriate opportunity to show good faith in the sum wanted for recovery
e.     Court showed that damages could be shown by plaintiff losses, Defendant unlawful gains, and punitive damages if state law allows them, and an injunction.
2.     28 U.S.C. §1332 (b) – If Federal Court Jurisdiction is solely based on diversity and final judgment is awarded less than $75K, the district court may deny costs to the plaintiff and in addition may impose costs on the plaintiff
a.     All Plaintiffs are from different states than all Defendants.
i. Domiciles (legal citizenship) where person physically is and intends to remain (this determines citizenship) (at the time you file the lawsuit)
1.     Individual – can be changed by physically moving and intending to remain [Mas]                         a. Presence: *Physical presence (you have to                                       get there somehow, step off the plane, drive over the state                        line) and;
                        b. Intent: the intent to remain indefinitely. The                                    domicile is determined when the time the action                                          hits the clerk’s desk           
2.     Corporation – headquarters
b.     Amount in controversy: The second part of diversity jurisdiction is the amount in controversy requirement. In order for a court to hear a cause under Diversity, the amount in controversy must exceed $75K, including aggregation if applicable. 
        ii. Aggregation: As long as they do no destroy diversity, multiple plaintiffs may aggregate claims against a single defendant if the plaintiff’s share a common undivided interest. A common undivided I interest refers to a legal relationship. Parties or the claims can be lumped together Aggregating claims for Amount-in-Controversy: Plaintiff may bring claims together to meet amount when single plaintiff has separate and distinct claim against single defendant or if 2nd defendant (must be legally linked) have single indivisible harm against one defendant because the harm to one is necessarily going to harm the other as well
                                                                        1. A single plaintiff may aggregate related claims to satisfy the                                                                                        amount in controversy against a single defendant
                                                                        2. More than one plaintiff may aggregate claims only if they                                                                                           share a common undivided interest
                                                                        3. Multiple defendants- generally no.
 
Legally bound (husband and wife)