Civil Procedure I Outline
Fall 2009
Bauries
I. A Survey of the Civil Action
A. Outline of the Procedure in a Civil Action
1. Selecting a Proper Court
2. Commencing the Action
3. Pleading and Parties
4. The Response
5. Obtaining Information Prior to Trial
6. Summary Judgment
7. Setting the Case for Trial
8. The Jury and Its Selection
9. The Trial
10. Submitting the Case to the Jury
11. Post-Trial Motions
12. The Judgment and Its Enforcement
13. Appeal
14. The Conclusiveness of Judgments
B. Illustrative Cases
1. The Authority of the Court to Proceed With the Action
a. Capron v. Van Noorden: Res Judicata (already been decided) doesn’t apply because trial court had no authority to try case; no subject matter jurisdiction; not sure if there is diversity of citizenship (need smj, pj, and venue).
b. Tickle v. Barton: service on defendant found in state acceptable unless occurred due to misrepresentation or fraud; plea in abatement (disputes service, not merits) granted for defendant.
2. Defining and Determining the Case Before Trial
a. Case v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.: no merit to complaint; demurrer for defendant granted; plaintiff cannot change claim and retry because too much of a burden on judicial system.
b. Alderman v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co.: summary judgment granted for defendant because plaintiff has burden of proof and cant establish claim (RULE 56: must wait 20 days after filing claim to make motion for SJ).
3. Judge and Jury: control of jury – instruction of jury and law to apply, form that verdict takes, judicial control of matters just can consider, taking from the jury of its power to decide a case when evidence is inadequate.
a. Instructing the Jury
i. Alexander v. Kramer Bros. Freight Lines, Inc.: plaintiff loses because of contributory negligence; usually defendant has burden to prove contributory negligence because he is using it as an affirmative defense; because of law in this jurisdiction, however, plaintiff has burden of proving freedom from contributory negligence; judge didn’t use jurisdictional law and plaintiff wins; defendant loses on appeal because objection to jury instructions not made at appropriate time; Rule 51: parties objecting to jury instructions must clearly state matter objecting to and grounds of objection to be reversed on appellate level.
b. The Form of the Verdict
i. Diniero v. United States Lines Co.: Judge withdrew jury questions because they caused confusion; appellate court affirmed this action; Rule 49(b) doesn’t prohibit this action here (jury questions and instructions).
c. The Jury’s Deliberation
i. Texas Employers’ Insurance Association v. Price: although a jury couldn’t reasonably find for plaintiff, jury misconduct (intro of outside evidence – personal experiences) in favor of plaintiff; on appeal, plaintiff’s verdict reversed; remanded for new trial.
d. Taking the Case From the Jury
i. Lavender v. Kurn: appellate courts will favor winner of lower level because lower level based on jury decision (unless no reasonable jury could’ve found the way that they did).
4. Appeal
a. Hicks v. United States
i. Trial court didn’t have sufficient evidence to rule out possibility that D was negligent as a matter of law and dismiss complaint in which P died.
5. Conclusiveness Judgments
i. Des Moines Navigation & R. Co. v. Iowa Homestead Co.: Res Judicata prevents same case from being tried again; plaintiff failed to appeal after first case; thus decision from first case must be given full faith and credit.
II. Jurisdiction Over the Parties and Their Property
A. The Traditional Bases for Jurisdiction: minimum contacts and notice; in personam – jurisdiction over person; in rem – over property (property gives rise to action).
i. Pennoyer v. Neff: (d) below doesn’t work because land not attached at time of suit; thus can’t be brought in rem; 14th amendment – no state shall deprive person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
(a): Appear in court (consent), or,
(b): Found in state, or,
(c): Resident of state, or,
(d): Property owner (up to the value of property
only)
AND
(a): must give service of notice.
B. Expanding the Bases of Personal Jurisdiction
i. Hess v. Pawloski: statute — consent to jurisdiction by affirmative (dangerous) action (action subject to regulation), lawsuit is about action, no discrimination for out-of-staters, precedential value (imposition of burden if Plaintiff had to go to a foreign state); implied consent – need actual notice.
Special appearance: to encourage defendant not to default; appearance merely to contest jurisdiction
C. A New Theory of Jurisdiction
i. International Shoe Co. v. Washington: consent– minimum contacts with state such that maintenance of suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice; identify all of defendant’s contacts with state; continuous and systematic activity (presence).
(a): lots of contacts + connected to suit = yes
(b): few contacts + unconnected to suit = no
(c): lots of contacts + unconnected to suit =
general jurisdiction = not a clear yes or no
(d): few contacts + connected to suit = specific
jurisdiction = not a clear yes or no
D. Specific Jurisdiction and State Long-Arm Laws: before considering anything else, have to establish that there is a long-arm statute in the state.
1. The Development of Long-Arm Laws
a. Gray v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp.: single act, suit related; OK’d by Illinois court and never reviewed by U.S. Supreme; if reviewed, probably would have been a “no”; debate as to whether defendant purposefully availed self (sold to 3rd party who incorporated into product and sold to P).
b. McGee v. International Life Insurance Co.: single act, suit related; OK; did purposefully avail self (dealt with P and knew it while P in another state); determine contacts and balance interests P and D and forum to decide if exercising jurisdiction is desirable.
c. Hanson v. Denckla: single act, suit related; not OK; didn’t purposefully avail self (dealt with person while in other state but didn’t intend to do so); contact was unilateral.
2. Due Process and Long-Arm Statutes
a. World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson: single act, related; not OK; didn’t purposefully avail self; 3 factors that, by th
tay in same court system; gives chance to plead merits too (Baldwin v. Iowa St. Traveling Men’s Assn)
a. Rule 12(b): may make motion before pleading (first contact).
i. Lack of jurisdiction over subject matter
ii. Lack of jurisdiction over person
iii. Improper venue
iv. Insufficiency of process
v. Insufficiency of service of process
vi. Failure to state claim upon which relief can be granted
vii. Failure to join party under Rule 19.
b. Rule 12(g): must consolidate defenses.
c. Rule 12(h)
i. 1 – defense for lack of jurisdiction over person, venue, process, service of process if omitted under (g), or not included in motion or responsive pleading is waived.
ii. 2 – defense of failure to state claim, failure to join under Rule 19 – make in pretrial pleading or motion or at trial.
iii. If motion made before pleading, must include every objection or they are waived.
2. Stay out of jurisdiction and have DF entered; can then object during enforcement proceedings, but if lose, it is over.
3. Must establish jurisdictional issues by preponderance of evidence; Data Disc: where jurisdictional issues intertwined with merits, jurisdictional issues cant be determined until after decision on the merits.
4. Collateral attack: separate attack in separate case (afterwards, if DF entered; argue jurisdiction).
III. Providing Notice and an Opportunity to be Heard
A. The Requirement of Reasonable Notice
1. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.: newspaper notice not OK it is not reasonably calculated notice under all circumstances to apprise interested parties of the pendancy the action and afford opportunity to present objections; only OK if it is no worse than other means. When addresses and names available, newspaper not OK; have to follow rules of jurisdiction and rules have to comply with Due Process.
B. The Mechanics of Giving Notice
1. Specific Applications of the Service Provisions: Rule 4(a) – summons required; Rule 4 (c)(2) – US Marshall or someone else over 18 who is not a party to suit.
a. “Waiver of Service”: Rule 4(d)(2) – has to be sent through first class mail or other reliable means; Rule 4(d)(3) – if Defendant doesn’t return in timely manner, have to find another way to serve and defendant is responsible for costs.
i. Maryland State Fireman’s Association v. Chaves: Defendant has to return waiver; if not, Plaintiff then has to serve properly; Plaintiff failed to do this here so not OK.
