Civil Procedure
Colin Starger
Fall 2013
Introduction
I. What is Civil Procedure?
A. Substantive
– “The Ends”
– Defines legal rights and duties in everyday conduct
B. Procedural
– “The Means”
– How to enforce substantive law
II. What is the underlying theme?
A. FRCP Rule 1
– Scope: all federal civil actions
– Purpose: to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determinations for trials
B. FRCP Rule 2
– There is one form of action – the civil action
C. FRAP Rule 1
– Scope: governs procedure in the United States courts of appeals
III. Types of Jurisdiction
A. Subject matter jurisdiction
– Authority of a court to hear cases of a particular type or cases involving a certain subject matter
B. Personal jurisdiction
– Authority of a court to render judgment against parties
C. Federal jurisdiction (subcategory of SMJ and PJ)
– In order for a court to hear a case, it must have the authority to rule on that subject and the authority to enter judgment against the defendant
IV. United States Court System
A. Adversary system
– One side versus the other
B. Role of judge
– To ensure that the FRCP & FRAP are upheld
– To be fair and impartial
– Band’s Refuse v. Borough of Fair Lawn
§ Facts: Borough issued ordinance requiring permit to collect trash, Band’s says the ordinance is unconstitutional
§ Issue: Did judge exceed his limit of authority?
§ Ruling: Yes, judge violated due process rights by crossing the line from impartiality to advocacy. He added issues and called his own witnesses. Converted the action from a trial to an investigation.
– Kothe v. Smith
§ Facts: Court sanctioned Smith for failing to abide by judge’s settlement recommendation
§ Issue: Did judge exceed his limit of authority?
§ Ruling: Yes, settlements are voluntary and cannot be a result of coercion or other pressure tactics
C. Role of litigants and attorney
– To present claims and evidence
– To argue for their side
Life of a Civil Case
I. Complaints generally
A. Purpose of pleadings
– Narrow the issues
– Give court notice
– Give other party notice
B. Notice Pleading v. Code Pleading
– Notice Pleading: do not have to state facts; just need to let the other party know what they are being sued over
– Code Pleading: pleading must specifically state what code item you are pleading and contain facts sufficient to support the alleged code (Field Code of NY)
C. Shift from notice to code pleading
– Added more weight to the discovery process
– Must state what facts you expect to get from discovery
D. Pleading v. Motion
– Pleading: statement of a claim
– Motion: asking the court to do something
II. Rules implicated by filing a complaint
A. FRCP Rule 3
– Filing a complaint commences the action
B. FRCP Rule 4
– What needs to be in a summons
– How to serve the summons
– Time limits
C. FRCP Rule 5
– When service is needed in filing the complaint
– How it should be made
– Who it should be made to
D. FRCP Rule 6
– Computing time
E. FRCP Rule 7
– Types of pleadings allowed
– What is needed for a motion
F. FRCP Rule 8
– Requires “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief”
– Gillispie v. Goodyear Service Stores
§ Facts: Gillispie filed a complaint alleging that the defendant trespassed, assaulted her, and cause her to be arrested
§ Issue: Was the complaint legally sufficient?
§ Ruling: No, complaint only stated legal conclusions (“assault, “trespass”) and did not include any supporting facts
– Swierkiewicz v.Sorema
§ Facts: Hungarian immigrant brought an employment discrimination action which was dismissed because it did not establish a prima facie case.
§ Issue: Was Swierkiewicz required to allege a prima facie case?
§ Ruling: No, only a short and plain statement. A prima facie case is an evidentiary standard for trial.
– McCormick v. Kopmann
§ Facts: Widow of McCormick filed a complaint that her husband had died because (1) Kopmann drove negligently and (2) bar had served him alcohol which contributed
§ Issue: Can a complaint contain inconsistent allegations?
§ Ruling: Yes, as long as plaintiff does not know that one is false
G. FRCP Rule 9
– Discusses how to plead special matters
– Facts must be specific, but the intent can be general
– Policy behind this is that such matters involve large corporations and huge discovery expenses, so there needs to be a stricter pleading standard
– Tellabs v. Makor Issues & Rights
§ Facts: Plaintiff alleged securities fraud and the company moved for failure to state a claim.
§ Issue: Did the complaint state, with sufficient particularity, enough information to withstand a motion to dismiss?
§ Ruling: No, a complaint alleging fraud will
defendant must state in short and plain statements its defenses to the claims, and admit, deny or lack sufficient knowledge for all the allegations
– If they do not respond to the allegation, and it does not relate to damages, they admit to it
B. Motions
– FRCP Rule 12
– Used to challenge both procedural and substantive defects in the initial pleading
§ 12(b)(6) = substantive
§ 12(b)(1-5,7) = procedural
– Lack of subject matter can be raised anytime
– 12(b)(1-5) must be raised before responsive pleading
– United States v. Board of Harbor Commissioners
§ Facts: United States filed a complaint alleging that the defendants discharged oil into a river, defendants moved for a more definitive statement
§ Issue: Was the complaint too vague?
§ Ruling: No, a complaint is sufficiently definite if the opposing party is fairly notified of the nature of the claim against it.
– When deciding on a 12(b)(6) motion, court must separate facts and conclusion
– Plaintiff pleads facts, court draws legal conclusions
– Mitchell v. Archibald & Kendall
§ Facts: Mitchell was a truck driver who was shot during an attempted robbery while waiting to unload goods. Although not stated in the complaint, argued that the company was liable because “premises” has a flexible meaning.
§ Issue: Was the dismissal of the complaint proper?
§ Ruling: Yes, a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim is decided on the basis of the facts pleaded in the complaint, not legal conclusions that may be alleged or drawn from the pleaded facts.
– Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
§ Facts: Telephone and internet subscribers sued their local telephone companies for monopoly power in violation on the Sherman Act. They based this on parallel conduct.
§ Issue: Did the plaintiff’s properly allege an antitrust conspiracy claim?
§ Ruling: No, plaintiff must show more than labels, conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action. The facts must show that the claim is plausible on its face.
