Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
32 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Personal Jurisdiction- Can P sue D is this state |
1. Statutory ex state long arm AND 2. Constitutional (Due Process) |
|
|
1.CA statutory person jurisdiction |
"The statute reaches the Constitutional limit" So, see Constitutional due process limit |
|
|
1. Constitutional Due Process Personal Jurisdiction |
"Such minimum contacts with the forum so that jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play adn substantial justice." Intl Shoe. This means: Contact, Relatedness and Fairness |
|
|
The Constitutional requirement of "Contact" for personal jurisdiction |
Contact means a relevant tie bw the D and the state: i. D must purposfully avail himself- reach out to the forum, benefit from the protections of the state, ex trying to make money, using the roads, causing some effect ii. Foreseeable- that D can be sued in the state |
|
|
The Constitutional requirement of "Relateness" for personal jurisdiction |
There must be a relation between the contact and the claim -Specific Jurisdiction: the claim arose out of the contact with CA -General Jusidiction: the D lives in CA, so the contact is automatically related
|
|
|
The Constitutional requirement of "Fairness" for personal jurisdiction |
Would it be fair to exercise jurisdiction: - Convenience: its ok unless D at SEVERE disadvantage -State's interest in providing a forum -P's interest, maybe wants to sue at home
|
|
|
Personal Jurisdiction Summary |
1. Statutory (same as 2.) 2. Constitutional - notions of fair play & justice i. Contact a. purposeful availment (reaching out) b. foreseeable (could get sued) ii. Relatedness a. specific- claim arose from contact b. general- D is domiciled in CA iii. Fairness a. convenience- severe disadvantage? b. state interest c. P's interest
|
|
|
Subject Matter Jurisdiction |
Superior Court- any civil case i. Limited- 25k orless, no injunction or dec. title ii. Unlimited- $25.01k, |
|
|
Pleadings- Frivolous Litigation |
Same as Rule 11 in fed court except Does not provide a 21 day safe harbor period, and there can be monetary punishments like paying the other's attorney fees so its not just a deterrent. "frivolous" means something raised completly without merit or asserted for the sole purpose of harming the other party |
|
|
Complaint; contents |
Must have a statement of "ultimate facts" constituting the cause of action. no need for jurisdiction statement. Demand for judgment i. should state an amount EXCEPT in -personal injury or wrongful death -When P is claiming punitive damages Disting. Fed- facts supporting plausible claims (vs ultimate facts supporting cause of action) |
|
|
Fictitious Defendant |
P is genuinely unaware of identity of D, may call them "Doe". P must allege she does not know the identity and must state the cause of action against the Doe D. |
|
|
Defendant's Response |
30 days after service of process (vs 21 for Fed. ) General demurrer special demurrer Motion to quash service of summons Motion to dismiss or stay for inconvenient forum Motion to Strike (AntiSLAPP motions) Answer |
|
|
General and special demurrer |
D must respond within 30 days (FedCt. 21 days) General Demurrer- failure to state facts sufficient to support a cause of action, lack of sub. matter juris. Special demurrer minor defenses: complaint is uncertain/ambiguous/unintelligible, lack of legal capacity, unclear on theories of liability, failure to file cert. of merit for suits against professionals.
|
|
|
Motion to quash service of summons (very important) |
"SPECIAL Appearance" Used to assert defenses of: -Lack of per. jur. -improper process -improper service of process
This MOTION MUST BE MADE BEFORE OR WITH A DEMURRER, ANSWER OR A MOTION TO STRIKE, OR ELSE WAIVED. |
|
|
Reclassification |
Judge can move form unlimited to limited if more than 25k is impossible or virtually unattainable. Can move from limited to unlimited if more than 25k is possible. |
|
|
Venue |
for state courts we decide the appropriate county. -For recovery of land, its where the land is. -where any D resides when the case is filed -for torts where the injury occured.
|
|
|
Substituted Service |
Can substitute when personal service cannot with reasonable diligence be had" must try personal first though. if not, then D's usual abode or mailing address Competent member of the house atleast 18 person must be informed of the contents process must also be mailed by first class mail |
|
|
Anti-SLAPP motion to strike |
Concern about lawsuits impeding public participation. Like those brought to chill 1st A rights. If brought burden shifts on P to show probability of success on the merits |
|
|
Answer |
D must response. for afirmative defenses D must state "ultimate facts" to support the defense. Must be filed within 30 days of service |
|
|
Claims by the Defendant- cross complaints |
1. D can assert a claim against P 2. against a co-D 3. against an impleaded third party all called cross complaints in state- not part of the answer like in Fed ct. Cross complaints against P from the same T/O are compulsory. Xcomplaints against a co-D or third are allowed if same T/O but not madatory |
|
|
Relation Back |
If a P filed a claim, then the statute of limitations has run on a claim, they can still amend the claim if it "relates back" to what the filed before. This applies in state courts and applies to a P who adds a D's name instead of Doe bc he knows the name know so long as its within 3 years and the P was genuinely ignorent before and had the name Doe originally. |
|
|
Discovery tools |
In CA, no limit on depos (Fed ct its 1 day 7hrs) Interrogatories- like Fedct, only to parties CA- no limit on form interrogatories, 35 specific interrogatories, no subparts. can file more with a "dec. for supporting need" than other party can seek protective order. |
|
|
Discovery- requests to produce |
In fed ct they can be used to get info from non parties if accompanied with subpoena in CA- you take the non-party's depo and serve him with the a subpoena duces tecum- bring the stuff with you |
|
|
supplemental discovery |
can request twice before trial date is set, then once after. |
|
|
Scope of discovery |
Fed Ct.- anything relevant to a claim or defense CA- anything relevant to the subject matter involved (slightly broader) more than whats admissible, privacy- balances privacy with need for into
|
|
|
Work product |
fed Ct.- anything prepared in anticipation of litigation, even non attorneys CA- must be generated by attorney or this agent |
|
|
Expert witnesses |
Can request simultanious exchange of expert witness information. Must exchange list to be called, nature of testimony and qualifications. |
|
|
Enforcement of discovery rules |
RAMBO- monetary (expenses and attorney fees) establishment order refusal to allow party support its position at trial striking pleadings entering default judgment against D dismissing P's cause of action |
|
|
Joining Parties- Class actions |
CA:must show 1. ascertainable class 2. well defined community of interest - common questions redominate - the rep is adequate - the class will result in substantial benefit to parties and court no different types like fed. no individual notice required. court decides who bares the cost of notifying (unlike Fed where rep does). CA does not require the court appoint class counsel. |
|
|
Extraordinary Writ |
If an order is not appealable, party may seek writ of mandate or prohibition from appeal court. technically this is not an appeal. it is an independent proceeding filing in the court of appeal. this is extraordinary. must show irreparable harm, normal route of appeal is inadequate, beneficial outcome in the result of the writ. Extraordinary writ is the only way to appeal a DENIAL of motion to quash service of summons |
|
|
Claim Preclusion (res judicata) |
3 requirments: 1. Same claimant against same defendant 2. case 1 ended in final judgment on the merits (ie not jurisdiction, venue, or indepensible party) 3. case 1 and 2 asserted the same claim Fed ct: same T/O CA: same right ex property, K |
|
|
Issue Preclusion (collateral estoppel) |
Relitigation of an issue. 1. case 1 eneded in valid judgment on the merits 2. same issue was actually litigated and decided 3. the issue in question was essential in case 1 4. assert only against someone who was a party in case 1 5. usually only by someone in case 1. If not, Nonmutual defense- used by D - ok nonmutal offense- used by P- only if fair, no inconsistent judgments on the record
|
