Select Page

Civil Procedure II
West Virginia University School of Law
Hamilton, Vivian Eulalia

3 Principles which Procedural Rules are Based
1) Fairness
2) Efficiency
3) Federal v. State Authority

Personal Jurisdiction
Subject matter jurisdiction-

Subject Matter Jurisdiction-
Concurrent- shared between several different types of court
Exclusive- restricted to a particular kind of court


General jurisdiction- Most can hear all cases except if a law says it can’t.
Limited jurisdiction- Can’t hear a case unless law says it can. All federal courts are limited jurisdiction.

Federal Courts- Must have Fed Question or Diversity Jurisdiction
Art III-
All cases in law and equity arising under the Constitution,
the laws of the US, and Treaties
Cases affecting Ambassadors, Ministers, and Consuls
Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction
Cases where US is a party
Between 2 or more states
Between a state and a citizen of another state
Between citizens of different states
Between citizens of the same state claiming land grants in different states
Between a state or citizen of a state and foreign state or citizen of
Congress limited Federal courts to decide nothing under damages of $75,000.

Goldberg v. Kelly

Recipients of federal aid of NY alleged that NY State and city officials administering programs of aid terminate such aid without prior notice and hearing, thereby denying them due process of law.
Judgment for P, D appealed.
HOLDING: NY’s terminating of public assistance was inadequate and violates the due process clause of the 14th Amendment b/c they don’t permit recipients to appear personally or to present evidence. Requires permitting recipients to appear personally with or with out counsel before official who finally determined continued eligibility and permitting recipient to present evidence to that officially orally or to confront or cross examine adverse witnesses. Cost for the poor not to get money outweighs the concern to prevent increase in fiscal burdens.
14th Amendment- All persons born in the US are citizens of that state. Nor shall any state deprive a person of life, liberty, or property with out due process of the law.

Mathews v. Eldridge
Eldridge got disability benefits for chronic anxiety, back strain, and diabetes. He filled out questionnaire for monitoring his condition. After looking at questionnaire they determined he no longer needed aid. He could was then allowed to send additional info about his condition. He wrote letter saying they had enough info to establish his condition. Aid was still terminated. Brought suit saying procedures were unconstitutional under 5th Amd, wanted evidentiary hearing.
HOLDING: Evidentiary hearing not required prior to termination of disability benefits and present procedures fully comfort with due process. Distinguished from Goldberg. Welfare v. Disabilities. Different b/c eligibility on benefits not based on financial need. Also b/c issues of credibility do not play a big role in disability b/c it relies on medical evidence. Not such a risk of error. More burden on government.

Private interest that is effected by gov. actions- Not based on financial need.
How accurate is the courts procedure- based on med experts
Government Interest- Large burden on gov.

Hawkins v. Masters Farms Inc.

Mr. Creal was killed in an auto accident when his van collided with a tractor driven by Masters (D). Masters from Kansas. At time of death Mr. Creal was living in Kansas with his wife and children. He had his clothes and memorabilia in Kansas home, but kept ties to Missouri. His car title, license, insurance were with Missouri. He filed action in fed court alleging diversity jurisdiction.
HOLDING: No diversity jurisdiction if D from Kansas and P domiciled in Kansas. No diversity jurisdiction b/c he was domiciled in Kansas. He had established physical presence in Kansas with intent to stay there.
RULE: A person is a citizen of the state in which they are “domiciled” established by the physical presence in a place in connection with a certain state of mind concerning ones intent to stay there.

Bridges v. Diesel Service Inc.

Bridges alleged that Diesel dismissed him from his job as a result of a disability thus violated the Americans with disabilities Act. Court dismissed complaint with out prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies b/c his lawyer did not file a charge with the EEOC until after commencement of this action.
Holding: Denied motion to pursue to Fed. Lawyer not sanctioned b/c not needed to deter counsel. She immediately filed proper papers. It wasn’t frivols. This was easily confusing.
RULE 11- Imposes obligation on counsel and client to stop, think, investigate and research before filing papers to initiate suit or conduct litigation. Only used in exceptional times when claim is frivolous.

Answering a Complaint


Affirmative Defense

Court Claim

Third Party Claim

Cross Claim
MOTION: request the court to do something
Pre answer motion- motion before answer is filed
RULE 12- Motions that defendants can file

Motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
Motion to dismiss for lack to state a claim, even if everything is true there is no case.

Complaint- asks the formal

s evidence that revealed that when Norton applied breaks an effective dead man device could have stopped to blades in .7 sec. This mowers blades stopped in 3-5 secs. That difference in time could have cost him his fingers.
Former Adjudication- A P who brings a case or a D who defends one should not be able to try again if they are not satisfied with result. Claim preclusion and Issue Preclusion.
Appeals address the correctness of a trial court ruling that are likely to have affected to outcome.

Apex Hosiery Co. v. Leader

Appeal from an order of court below made under Federal Rule for discovery and production by them of docs for inspection, copying for use at the trial.
HOLDING: Courts of appeal have no jurisdiction over appeals from judgment or rulings that are not final. Therefore not subject to appeal. FINAL JUDGEMENT RULE
Final Judgment Rule- More important to bring litigation to the end than to assure every ruling was perfectly correct. Affects the timing of appeals. Says appellant courts should scrutinize TC in 2 ways

Finding of facts should be affirmed unless clearly erroneous
Rulings of Law should be subject to reversal if wrong in any aspect

Summary Judgment_ Moving partying saying we don’t need to take this case to trial. You can already make decision to my favor.



After evidence given in trial any party can move for a directed verdict.

happens after jury entered a verdict, Judge overrules jury. decides what laws apply. decide which facts are true. exist to try contested factsJoined parties- People suing each other already in the case. D’s sue each other. People on same side of V- Bring a case to someone else.- Now that you mentioned it I have a gripe of my own. D suit toward P. People on different side of V- yes, but there are other factors.- No, not true. Or insufficient knowledge to whether it is true. Yes that is true(Distinguished from Goldberg)Cases that go to federal court: – Place of trial. What actual court in what county.Whether a court can hear a particular type of dispute.- When a specific court has the authority over a person.