Reading...
Play button
Play button
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;
73 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What is the scope of the CA long arm statute?
|
It reaches the limit of the federal Constitution.
|
|
|
What is the Constitutional test for personal jurisdiction?
|
Does D have such minimum contacts with the forum so that the exercise of jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
Note: International Shoe |
|
|
What is are the general factors under the Constitutional analysis for personal jurisdiction?
|
1) CONTACT: there must be a relevant tie between D and the forum state
2) FAIRNESS: the exercise of jurisdiction must be fair and reasonable under the circumstances. |
|
|
What are the factors for establishing contact under the Constitutional analysis for personal jurisdiction?
|
1) The contact must result from PURPOSEFUL AVAILMENT (D's voluntary act), AND
2) Foreseeability: must be foreseeable that D could be sued in the forum |
|
|
What are the factors for establishing fairness under the Constitutional analysis for personal jurisdiction?
|
1) RELATEDNESS between the contact and P's claim (i.e. specific vs. general jurisdiction)
2) CONVENIENCE to D (forum OK unless puts D at SEVERE disadvantage in the litigation) 3) State's interest (e.g. protecting citizens from harms by out-of-staters) |
|
|
What is specific personal jurisdiction?
|
Where P's claim arose from D's contact in the forum.
Note: Don't need continuous and systematic ties as with general PJ. |
|
|
What is general personal jurisdiction?
|
Where P's claim does NOT arise from D's contact in the forum, PJ only exists where D has CONTINUOUS and SYSTEMATIC ties with the forum.
Note: If there are continuous and systematic ties, D may be sued in the forum for a claim that arose anywhere in the world. |
|
|
What are examples of continuous and systematic ties for general personal jurisdiction?
|
1) Domicile
2) Incorporation 3) PPB |
|
|
What is the pneumonic for the Constitutional test for personal jurisdiction?
|
My Parents Frequently Forgot to Read Childrens' Stories:
1) Minimum contacts 2) Purposeful availment 3) Foreseeability 4) Fair play & substantial justice 5) Relatedness of contact & claim 6) Convenience 7) State's interest |
|
|
What is the scope of a CA Superior Court's subject matter jurisdiction?
|
General (i.e. they can hear ANY civil case).
|
|
|
What is a limited civil case in a CA Superior Court?
|
A civil case in which the amount in controversy is less than $25k.
|
|
|
Which party initially determines the classification of a case in CA Superior Court?
|
The plaintiff. If she files a limited civil case, she must note the classification in the caption of the complaint.
|
|
|
When will a CA Superior Court grant a motion to reclassify a case from limited to unlimited?
|
When the judge is convinced that there is a possibility that the verdict will exceed $25k.
|
|
|
What are the aggregation rules in CA courts?
|
1) One P vs. one D may aggregate claims so as to file unlimited
|
|
|
Hypo: P sues D for $10. D files a cross complaint for $26k. Limited or unlimited case?
|
Unlimited (if any claim is more than $25k = unlimited).
|
|
|
In CA, where do you lay venue for an in rem action?
|
In the COUNTY where the property lies.
|
|
|
Where is venue proper for a transitory action in CA?
|
General rule: Venue is proper in any county where any D resides when the case is filed.
|
|
|
What is the special venue rule for contract cases in CA?
|
Venue is ALSO proper in the county where the contract was entered or to be performed.
|
|
|
What is the special venue rule for personal injury cases (or wrongful death) in CA?
|
Venue is ALSO proper in the county where the injury occurred.
|
|
|
When may a transfer be granted in CA where the original venue is proper?
|
1) There is reason to believe impartial trial cannot be had
2) Convenience of witnesses and ends of justice would be promoted, OR 3) No judge is qualified to act Note: Transfer to forum parties agree on or if can't agree transferor court decides |
|
|
When may a CA court dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds?
|
By motion of a party or sua sponte, where the court finds that "in the interests of substantial justice" the case should be heard outside CA.
NOTE: Court looks at same public and private factors as in federal court. |
|
|
When can you use substituted service of process in CA?
|
ONLY when personal service with cannot be had with reasonable diligence.
Rules: 1) Must be made at D's usual abode or mailing address 2) Must be left with competent member of household at least 18 3) Person must be informed of contents 4) Process must also be mailed first class Note: Substituted service effective 10 days after mailing. |
|
|
What is CA's pleading requirement?
|
FACT pleading (i.e. more details required than in federal court). Rule:
Must allege the ultimate facts on each element of each claim. |
|
|
What must be included in a complaint in CA?
|
1) Statement of facts constituting the cause of action (ultimate facts)
2) Demand for judgment for relief sought |
|
|
In CA, in what cases can P NOT state the amount of damages in the complaint?
|
1) Personal injury/wrongful death
2) Claims for punitive damages Note: D may request P's "statement of damages" & P must provide within 15 days |
|
|
What are the rules for naming a fictitious D in CA?
|
1) D must be genuinely unaware of D's identity
2) Must state the cause of action against the "Doe" defendant |
|
|
How long does a D have to respond to service of process in CA?
|
30 days.
|
|
|
What is a general demurrer?
|
A response to service of process that can assert two defenses:
1) P failed to state FACTS sufficient to constitute a cause of action (very similar to 12(b)6 motion), OR 2) Lack of subject matter jurisdiction (very rare) |
|
|
What is a motion to quash service of summons used for?
|
To assert the defenses of:
1) Lack of personal jurisdiction 2) Improper process 3) Improper service of process |
|
|
What are the timing rules for a motion to quash service of summons?
|
Before or with a demurrer or a motion to strike, or else WAIVED.
|
|
|
May a D raise the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction in the answer?
|
NO! Must be raised in a motion to quash service of summons filed before or with the answer or WAIVED.
|
|
|
How can a party seek appellate review if trial court denies the motion to quash service of summons?
|
ONLY by seeking a writ of mandate from the Court of Appeal within 10 days of service of the written notice of the order denying the motion.
|
|
|
What is an anti-SLAPP motion?
|
A motion to strike a "strategic lawsuit against public participation." Brought where P's sues for an act D took in furtherance of her free speech rights or right to petition the government. Rules:
1) D must show that P's cause of action arises from protected activity, then 2) Burden shifts to P to show probability of winning on the merits |
|
|
When is an anti-SLAPP motion unavailable?
|
When P's case is
1) Truly in the public interest, or 2) On behalf of the general public |
|
|
What result if D wins on an anti-SLAPP motion?
|
D can sue P for malicious prosecution (SLAPPback suit).
|
|
|
In CA, may D include a demand for recovery against P in her answer?
|
No, must have a cross-complaint.
|
|
|
In CA, what is the term for the equivalent of a counterclaim, a cross-claim, and an impleader?
|
Cross-complaint.
|
|
|
When must a cross-complaint be filed in CA?
|
Before or at the same time as the answer.
|
|
|
In CA, when is a cross-complaint compulsory?
|
Depends on who it is filed against
1) Plaintiff or a co-party: when it arises out of the same T/O as the underlying claim or dispute 2) Third party defendant: NEVER |
|
|
In CA, when do parties have a right to amend a pleading as a matter of course?
|
1) P may do so before D files an answer or demurrer
2) After demurrer but before trial, a party may amend ONCE as a matter of course |
|
|
In CA, when can you use relation back for fictitious defendants?
|
1) Original complaint was filed before the SOL ran and contained charging allegations against the fictitious D
2) P was genuinely ignorant of the identity of the Doe defendant, AND 3) P pleading that ignorance in the original complaint |
|
|
How long may you use relation back for fictitious defendants?
|
As long as P substituted the true D within 3 years of filing.
|
|
|
In CA, what are the required disclosures under the discovery rules?
|
NONE!
|
|
|
In CA, how many depositions may a party take in a limited civil case?
|
One
|
|
|
In CA, how many interrogatories, inspection demands, and requests for admission may each party make to another party in a limited civil case?
|
Combined total of thirty-five.
|
|
|
How does CA's constitutional right to privacy affect the scope of discovery?
|
The court must balance the need for discovery with the need for privacy.
|
|
|
In CA, who may generate protected work product?
|
ONLY an attorney or an attorney's agent.
|
|
|
In CA, what are the general statutory requirements to bring a class action?
|
1) Ascertainable class, and
2) Well-defined community of interests |
|
|
In CA, what will a court consider in determining whether there is a well-defined community of interest for class actions?
|
Whether
1) Common questions predominate, 2) The rep is adequate 3) Class will result in substantial benefit to parties and the court Note: Congressional Quarterly Readers Are Super Boring |
|
|
In CA class actions, which party must bear the cost of notice to the class?
|
It's up to the court.
|
|
|
Does CA require the court to appoint class counsel in a class action?
|
No
|
|
|
In CA, how do you calculate the amount in controversy in class actions for determining limited/unlimited status?
|
Aggregate the class claims
|
|
|
When MUST a case be dismissed in CA?
|
Mandatory dismissal IF:
1) Case is not brought to trial within 5 years after filing, OR 2) Process not served within 3 years after filing |
|
|
In CA, what is the burden-shifting analysis for summary judgment?
|
If the moving party shows the cause of action or defense lacks merit, the burden shifts to the opposing party to demonstrate that a triable issue of FACT exists.
|
|
|
In CA, is there a right to a civil jury trial?
|
Yes, but under the CA constitution (the 7th Amendment doesn't apply to state courts).
|
|
|
In CA, what are the impermissible grounds for preemptory juror strikes?
|
1) Race
2) Color 3) Religion 4) Sex 5) National origin 6) Sexual orientation 7) Other similar grounds |
|
|
In CA, must a party that makes a motion for JNOV have made a motion for directed verdict at trial?
|
No (contra federal JMOL & RJMOL).
|
|
|
In CA, when can the court order a new trial for excessive or inadequate damages?
|
When the damages (or lack thereof) shocks the conscience.
|
|
|
In CA, what is remittitur?
|
Where the court finds the damage award shocks the conscience, the plaintiff has the choice of a new trial or a new lower figure set the court.
|
|
|
In CA, what is additur?
|
Where the court finds the damage figure is so inadequate it shocks the conscience, the defendant has the choice of a new trial or a new higher figure set by the court.
|
|
|
Is remittur and additur allowed in federal court?
|
Yes for remittitur. Additur unconstitutional in federal court (violates the 7th Amendment).
|
|
|
Does CA follow the final judgment rule?
|
Yes (subject to interlocutory appeals).
|
|
|
If Case 2 is in a different court system (e.g. federal or state) from Case 1, which system's law applies regarding claim and issue preclusion?
|
The law of the system that decided Case 1.
|
|
|
If the judgment in Case 1 has been appealed (or the time for appeal has not expired), is that judgment entitled to claim and issue preclusion effect?
|
Federal = yes
CA = no |
|
|
What are the requirements for res judicata?
|
AKA claim preclusion:
1) Case 1 and Case 2 were brought by the same claimant against the same defendant (not just same parties!) 2) Case 1 ended in a final judgment on the merits (ANY judgement meets unless based on jurisdiction, venue or indispensable parties). 3) Case 1 and Case 2 asserted the same cause of action (or claim) |
|
|
What is the primary rights theory for claim preclusion?
|
In CA only, you get one cause of action for every right invaded (contra same T/O rule in federal courts). Thus, different causes of action for personal injury and property damage arising out of same car accident.
|
|
|
What are the rules for collateral estoppel?
|
AKA issue preclusion:
1) Case 1 ended on a valid, final judgment on the merits 2) The same issue was actually litigated and determined in Case 1 (e.g. won't work with default) 3) That issue was essential to judgment in Case 1 4) Only applies against a party who was a party to Case 1 5) By a party to Case 1 OR look to the mutuality rules |
|
|
What is nonmutual collateral estoppel
|
Where someone who was not a party to Case 1 tries to assert collateral estoppel against a party that was.
|
|
|
What are the rules for defensive nonmutual collateral estoppel?
|
This is where a DEFENDANT who was not a party to Case 1 asserts collateral estoppel against the plaintiff (who was). Allowed in CA and in federal court IF the plaintiff had a full chance to litigate in Case 1.
|
|
|
What are the rules for offenseive nonmutual collateral estoppel?
|
This is where a PLAINTIFF who was not a party to Case 1 asserts collateral estoppel against the defendant (who was). Federal and CA will allow IF it is not unfair. Factors:
1) Did D have a full and fair opportunity to litigate in Case 1? 2) Could D foresee multiple suits? 3) Could P have joined easily in Case 1? 4) Are there inconsistent judgments on the record (e.g. multiple litigations with different results)? |
|
|
What is the most important consideration in analyzing D's purposeful availment of the forum in a personal jurisdiction question?
|
Whether D enjoyed the BENEFITS and PROTECTIONS of the law.
|
|
|
What automatically makes D subject to PJ in a forum?
|
If she was served while PHYSICALLY PRESENT in the forum (note that service by fraud or force is invalid).
|
|
|
What are the general requirements for res judicata?
|
AKA claim preclusion:
1) There was a final, valid judgment on the merits in Case 1 2) Both cases were brought by the same claimant against the same defendant 3) The same cause of action is involved in both cases 4) The cause of action was actually litigated or could have been litigated in Case 1 |
