Civ. Pro. I
Schueler
Fall 2015
I. Introductory Materials
A. Process of Litigation
1. Pleadings – documents filed by each side to state their position on the issue in dispute and to begin the case
a. Complaint –plaintiff starts the suit and includes facts, legal claims, and relief sought
b. Answer –defendant responds to each allegation and asserts any affirmative defenses
c. Joinder – rules on who can be a party to a dispute and the scope of allowable claims
2. Early Motion Practice
a. a motion is a document asking the court to act and enter an order
3. Discovery – parties exchange of relevant information before trial
a. U.S. cases promote a very broad discovery process to lead to a more effective trial and encourage settlement of most cases
4. Judicial Conferences – help with the judge’s ability to manage cases. Scheduling conference to set deadlines and pretrial conferences to cover any matters relevant to planning for trial
5. Motions for Summary Judgment – filed after discovery if one side does not have the evidence necessary to establish facts required for recovery
6. Trial: Jury selection, opening statements, Plaintiffs case in chief, Defendants case in chief, closing statements, judges charge to the jury, verdict
7. Post-trial motions can be filed by either party, usually the losing party will try to argue for a judgment NOV, or new trial on some grounds
8. Appeals
9. Effects of Judgment on future litigation
a. claim and issue preclusion – limits on re-litigation of claims and issues resolved by previous cases (similar to criminal trials, double jeopardy rule)
B. Two Court Systems (State and Federal)
1. State Court System – Established by legislature
a. Trial Courts – Original Jurisdiction
i. Trial courts of both broad and specialized jurisdiction (ex. probate, family, housing, land, small claims)
b. Intermediate Appellate Court
c. Court of Final Review
(1) not every state has two appellate court levels, but all have at least one
2. Federal Court System – Established by U.S. Constitution and acts of Congress
a. Article III, Section I of the U.S. Constitution establishes a federal supreme court and leaves the establishment of lower federal courts to Congress
b. Judiciary Act of 1789 – enacted by the first congress to establish the lower federal courts
c. 3 Levels of Courts in the U.S. Federal system:
(1) Federal District Courts – trial courts
(a) U.S. broken up into 94 federal districts
(b) These courts have original jurisdiction, but there jurisdiction is much more limited than state trial courts
(2) Federal Courts of Appeal – circuit courts, appellate review
(a) U.S. Divided into 12 circuits
(3) U.S. Supreme Court – Rulings bind all state and federal courts
(a) 9 justices on the Supreme Court
(b) Appeals are almost always discretionary; they grant cert. to only 1-2% of cases
(c) Very limited original jurisdiction
(d) May choose to hear cases from the state court system only after they have been decided by the state’s highest court and if they involve federal law
II. Personal Jurisdiction
A. Introductory Principles
1. Courts authority to exercise power over a defendant in a lawsuit
2. Rooted in the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution
3. Two kinds of personal jurisdiction
a. In Rem: power of a court to exercise authority over a defendant’s specific property
b. In Personam: power of a court to exercise authority over a defendant
4. The Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution allows a plaintiff to take an in personam judgement to another state where the defendant has assets for enforcement. However, it does not allow an in rem judgement to be enforced in another state.
B. Historical Approaches
1. Pennoyer v. Neff
a. For a court to have in personam jurisdiction the defendant must be personally served with notice of the lawsuit while physically inside the state.
b. Location of the Defendant at the time of being served is what the court looked at. It did not matter what State the Defendant was a citizen of.
c. For a court to have in rem jurisdiction over property it must be located within the state and attached to the lawsuit before the judgement.
d. Reinforced the idea of sovereign states that have exclusive control over the people and property located within their borders.
2. Hess v. Pawloski
a. Started to demonstrate problems with the test for personal jurisdiction from Pennoyer.
b. The increasing mobility of society from the invention of the automobile rendered Pennoyer an ineffective test for personal jurisdiction.
c. Massachusetts statute said that nonresidents who used Mass. roadways implied consent for an official of the Commonwealth be served process in their place so long as a copy was sent to the out of state defendant as well.
d. Supreme Court upheld the statute and said it did not violate Pennoyer’s “personal service within the state” test.
e. Began to bend the rule from Pennoyer
C. Development of a New Test
state distributors, setting up channels to provide advice for customers in the state)
(2) “Brennan’s Four” view: Pure Stream of Commerce
(a) Placement of your product into the stream of commerce is all that is required
(b) The defendant receives economic benefit from sales in the forum state
(c) The defendant indirectly benefits from the forum states laws regulating commercial activity
(d) These benefits are received whether the defendant purposefully avails itself of the forum state or not
(3) Steven’s said stream of commerce not an issue because the majority agrees the reasonableness requirement is not satisfied.
(a) If we did analyze the minimum contacts the volume of sales would be relevant.
b. This question has still not been definitively decided. In McIntyre the court looked as if they would resolve the issue, but refused to do so.
(1) Justice Kennedy endorsed J. O’Connor’s view requiring stream of commerce plus and saying, the mere expectation or hope that a defendant’s product will be sold in a State is not enough to grant personal jurisdiction there.
(2) Justice Ginsberg endorsed the view of J. Brennan and reasoned pure stream of commerce was enough, saying where a defendant seeks to sell their product in several States, it is reasonable to subject them to suit in any State which their product causes injury.
(3) Justice Breyer followed J. Stevens, and would not weigh in on the stream of commerce question, simply resting on the fact that the defendant had only isolated contacts with the requested forum.
4. Otherwise fair and reasonable requirement
a. The courts in World-Wide Volkswagen held the following factors must be considered in determining what is “otherwise fair and reasonable”:
(1) The forum states interest in the suit;
(2) The plaintiff’s interest in obtaining relief from a positive judgement;
(3) The burden on the defendant if forced to appear and answer the suit;
(4) The interstate-judicial systems interest in efficiency (i.e. location of witnesses and evidence).
