Civil Procedure II Outline

Civil Procedure 2

Professor Wildenthal

Fall 2014

Thomas Jefferson School of Law

I) Outline:

SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION

Definition = Authority of the Federal Court to hear a claim that is otherwise jurisdictionally insufficient.

Where a party joins a claim in an action that could have been brought in federal court on its own, there is no need for SJ.

Original jurisdiction (federal Q or diversity) + common nucleus of operative fact

Meaning the same event and you usually have to litigate it together – this way you can bring State claims in Federal court

§1367 = Supplemental Jurisdiction

Authorizes a federal court that has “original jurisdiction” over one claim in the original case to hear all other claims that are part of the same case/controversy

Extends to claims by/against additional parties — even if no claim by/against that party confers original jurisdiction on the federal court

Bars jurisdiction over certain claims by P’s in cases based on diversity jurisdictions

Meaning that complete diversity must be held + amount in controversy (AIC) must be met.

P’s can aggregate AIC IF one of the P’s meets the amount.

Complete Diversity MUST be kept

Impleaders – 3rd party defendants – need their own SMJ

Gibbs Court = Supreme Court held that a federal court has jurisdiction over one of the P’s claims may hear other claims that arise out of the same nucleus of operative fact

· Those claims must satisfy constitutional standard in Gibbs and the court has statutory authority

· Meaning — when a district court has original jurisdiction over a claim it MUST also have SJ over other claims that “are so related to claims in action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case/controversy under Article 3, Sec. 2” = Common Nucleus of Operative Fact

District Court MAY decline to exercise SJ over a claim when …

Claim rises novel or complex issues of State Law

Claim substantially predominates over original jurisdiction claim

Court has dismissed original jurisdictional claims

If fed claim gets knocked out for trial, the court can still here the state claim, if there has been a lot of resources used

In exceptional circumstances there are other compelling reasons to decline SJ

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

CLASS ACTIONS

Analysis Structure

Meet SMJ

Meeting all SMJ

Diversity regarding only the named parties

AIC ($75,000 +) can’t aggregate but there can be tag along –> means only one representative needs to meet the AIC requirement

EXAM TIP: When you analysis diversity – you only look at the class representatives

Reps. & Class must share an interest in the claim + the class must be adequately represented by the Reps + the judicial process/conduct must be transparent.

Define the class

Meet 23(a) requirements

Fit into at least ONE of the categories from 23(b)

Settlement?

Just must approve

A court must certify the action as a class action by meeting the requirements of 23a:

Numerosity =

More than 25 not less than 40

Joinder of all members is impracticable under rule 19/20

Commonality

Common questions of law/fact

Critical question of whether differences in the factual back ground of each claim will affect the outcome of the legal issue

One significant question of law/fact

Typicality

The claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class

Compare the class reps + the class = suffer same harm

Adequacy – fair/adequate representation

The representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.

The party has to be adequately represented

Types of Class Action :

FRCP 23(b)(1): Prejudice

Prejudice Class Actions (Could there be a prejudice against someone if not certified as a class)

No class action could result in prejudice to defendant (i.e. inconsistent obligations/verdicts )

No class action could result in prejudice to plaintiff ( i.e. limited funds—not going to be fair if there is only $10K that could be divided among the people that file the suit, so that three people do not get the entire money)

Note: Can’t opt out

If no class action –> prejudice + can’t opt out + Notice Option

Class Notes on 23b1:

Unusual – evidence that there would be evident harm without class action

Not allow a class action that would be prejudice to P or D

D’s inconsistent obligation would have to each P

P would be limited to what is left

Injunctive to apply to the class as a whole or that you don’t want any stray law suits – doing separate lawsuits wouldn’t make sense, they might be different for all plaintiff, they could potentially harm P’s or D’s — you don’t want an opt-out option. This is mandatory.

Notice is optional – just so you know that rights will be affected by the class action

FRCP 23(b)(2): “Injunctive Class Actions”

When plaintiff class seeks injunctive/declaratory relief (asking for something to change)

Most class actions of today

Plaintiff does not have to get notice and you do not have a chance to opt out (policy changes

P’s class seeks injunctive/declaratory relief – neither involve awarding money damages

Can’t opt-out, notice it’s self is optional.

Note: Seek injunction/declaratory + can’t opt out + optional notice

FRCP 23(b)(3): “Damages Class Actions” (more complicated because the party is bound)

When plaintiff class seeks damages must also show: