Civil Procedure I Outline

CIVIL PROCEDURE I

Prof. Scott Dodson

FALL 2014

PART I — JURISDICTION

1. Personal Jurisdiction

a. Power of a court over parties involved

b. How to establish PJ

1. Citizenship in forum state (Pennoyer)

i. Or, if PROPERTY in question is in forum state (and case is in rem)

2. In-state service (Pennoyer)

3. Consent (Pennoyer)

4. Whether there are minimum contacts with forum state that “comport with traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice” (Int’l Shoe Co v Washington)

i. General Jurisdiction (Goodyear) à person or company has “continuous and systematic contacts” with forum state so as to be “fairly at home” there.

ii. Specific Jurisdiction (McIntyre v Nicastro) applies if contacts with forum state give rise to cause of action. Lower threshold than GJ

A. Kennedy (majority): Sufficient proxy for consent that person/company has purposefully availed itself to benefits and privileges of operating in forum state

B. Breyer (concurring): Either regular business or purposeful targeting of forum state is needed to establish consent to jurisdiction. Is it reasonably foreseeable to ∆ to be brought to trial in forum state?

C. Ginsburg (dissent): Not consent but fairness, is it fair to hold person/company liable in forum state? Factors: burden on ∆, interest of the state, convenience to the π.

D. Daimler v Bauman: Substantial conduct to “fairly deem ∆ at home in forum state” for GJ; Purposeful availment/reasonable foreseeability, benefits & privileges for SJ

c. Requires both Constitutional and Statutory Authorization

1. 14th Amendment: DPC (shall not deprive any person of life/liberty/property without due process of the law)

2. State statute: Long-arm Statute is state’s decision of how much jurisdiction they wish to pursue. Can be up to and include the limits of DPC 14 (like California). Case must pass state statute in order to create PJ.

d. Challenging PJ

1. Consent

2. Special Appearance (state) or Rule 12 motion (Fed): appear or submit briefs to challenge PJ

i. Must be first motion written

ii. Must do in answer to complaint or motion

iii. Immune from service if appearing.

3. Do nothing (Collateral Attack)

i. Default judgment against ∆ in this case

ii. No right to appeal, may only challenge on jurisdictional grounds

2. Subject-Matter Jurisdiction

a. Power of a court over the kind of case being tried

b. Need both Constitutional and Statutory authorization

1. Constitution Article III §2: Cases arising under Constitution; controversies between two or more states; between a state and citizens of different states; between state and citizens thereof, and foreign states/citizens/subjects

2. Statutory:

i. 28 U.S.C. § 1331 à FQJ

ii. § 1332 à DJ

iii. § 1367 à SuppJ

2a. Diversity Jurisdiction (§1332)

a. Constitutional Authorization: Does not require complete diversity, as long as one member of π side is different from one member of ∆ side.

b. Statutory Authorization: Diversity of citizenship and satisfactory amount in controversy à COMPLETE DIVERSITY REQUIRED, and AIC >$75k exclusive of interests or costs

1. Diversity requirement: If multiple parties, no π can share citizenship with any ∆

Parties

Jurisdiction?

P (VA) + French Citizen v. D (NY) + German Citizen

Yes

P (VA) v. German Citizen

Yes

P (VA) v. D (NY) + German Citizen

Yes

French Citizen v. German Citizen

No

French Citizen v. D (NY)+German Citizen

No