Civil Procedure I: D’IsaHilary Term 2008
Book: Yeazell – Civil Procedure, 6th Ed. 2004
INTRODUCTION
State Court
1. 3 tier system
a. Trial Court (lower court)
i. use general discretion; hear just about anything
ii. lose at trial court, have one appeal to the intermediate level
1. appeal is automatic (no “hurdles” to jump over)
b. Intermediate Court of Appeals
i. some states eliminate this tier
ii. lose case at court of appeals, do not automatically go to Supreme Court
c. Supreme Court
i. appeals are allowed on a discretionary basis
ii. death penalty appeal automatically go to this level
Federal Court
1. 3 tier system
a. U.S. District Court – has original jurisdiction
i. 94 Federal Districts
1. every state has at least one federal district
ii. automatic appeal to Circuit Court
b. U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals – has some original jurisdiction
i. 13 circuits
1. 11 numbered (1-11; PA – 3rd District)
2. DC Circuit
3. Federal
a. takes appeals from specialized federal courts
c. U.S. Supreme Court
i. nine judges, all appointed to a lifetime tenure
ii. need to get certiorari if appeal from Circuit Court
1. also need if appealing from state Supreme Court (only state court that can go to U.S. Supreme Court)
2. federal courts are of limited subject matter jurisdiction
a. limited by the U.S. Constitution Article III, §2 and federal statutes
3. to get into court must have SMJ + PJ + VENUE + NOTICE
SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION (SMJ) (cannot be collaterally attacked; evaluate each claim separately)
Introduction
1. the courts authority over subject matter of a lawsuit; power to hear case
a. arises under (and is limited to the clauses of) Article III of the Constitution
b. burden on the plaintiff/claimant to establish this
i. FRCP, 8 – assert claim for SMJ in plea/complaint
2. cannot be waived
a. don’t use it, can’t lose it
3. may be
s/statutes, treaties
i. 2 interpretations of “arising under”SMJ (only concerned with statutory)
1. Statutory (28 U.S.C. §1331) – must satisfy either the creation test or substantial federal ingredient test
ii. doesn’t limit to federal courts, may bring action in state court
2. Louisville v. Mottley (train passes no longer honored; SC raised SMJ; decided lacks SMJ; Mottley did not raise federal question, merely anticipated defense)
a. creation test (test used to apply on exam)– did federal law create the claim
i. well-pleaded complaint rule – the plaintiff’s claim alone determines the presence or absence of statutory “arising under” SMJ
1. cannot anticipate/plead a federal defense to get the case in federal court under 28 U.S.C. §1331 – Federal Question
