Civil Procedure

Front 1

What is Subject Matter Jursidiction

Back 1

Subject matter jurisdiction is the power of the court to hear and determine a particular type of claim or controversy

Front 2

Federal Subject Matter jursidiction

Back 2

Limied subject matter jursidictions means that they can hear, for the most part only two types of claims 1) federal question
2) diversity of citizenship

Front 3

State Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Back 3

The California state superior court is a court of general subject matter jurisdiction because it cane hear all claims arising unde the state law and clism arising under the federal law

Front 4

Federal Court, (congress) exclusive jurisdictions

Back 4

1) Admirality cases
2) Bankrupcy cases
3) Paten and Copyright caes
4) Certain Antitrust Cases

Front 5

Federal Question Jurisdiction

Back 5

The federal courts can hear cases which arise under the Constitution, law of treaties of the U.S.

Front 6

Well Pleaded complaint Rule

Back 6

Substantial federal issues must be raised as a legitimate part of the plaintiff's cause of action.

Front 7

Diversity of Citizenship Jurisdication

Back 7

The federal district courts have original jurisdiction over all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds in the sum or value of $75,000 exclusive of interest and costs and the controversy is between

1) citizens of different states

2) Citizens of a state and citizens or subject of a foreign state

3) Citizen of different states and in which citizens or subject of a foreign state are additional parties

4) A foreigh state, as plaintiff and citizens of a state or a different state

Front 8

Amount in Controversy

Back 8

The sum claimed by the plaintiff in his complaijnt controls if the claim is made in good faith. Jurisdiction is not lost in the event that plaintiff ultimately recovers an amount below $75,000

Front 9

Aggregation

Back 9

1) a single plaintiff may aggregate all his claim against is single defendant to meet the requisite amount in controversy

2) Plaintiffs may only aggregate if their claims are based upon a common undivided interest. (partnerhship)

3) Aggregation rules also applies to class actions. Thus, each member of the class with a separate and distinct laim must meet the amount in controversy requirement.

Front 10

What happen if second plaintiff claim is less than $75,000?

Back 10

Where one plaintiff's claim exceeds $75,000 and a second plaintiff's claim against the same defendant is less than $75,000 some courts have allowed the second plaintiff to assert supplemental jurisdiction

Front 11

Plaintiff suing multiple defendants - can she aggregate claims?

Back 11

Cannot aggregate his claims unless the defendants are jointly liable to plaintiff as where plaintiff sues individual partners of a partnership for damages in excess of $75,000

Front 12

Complete Diversity

Back 12

Where jurisdiction is based upon diversity of citizenship diversity between plaintiffs and defendant must be complete meaning that no plaintiff may be a citizen of the same state as any one of the defendants

Front 13

Definition of citizenship of a state

Back 13

The party must
1) domicled within a state
2) a citizen of the United States

A natural person's domicle is defined as the state where he
a) physically resides
b) with the intent to remain for the indefinite future

Residence- the person must actually have fixed and permanent home in the state

Intent- Many facts can be relevant to person's intent , current residence, place of employment, voting or autombile registration, bank accounts, where his children go to school, where he pays taxes

Front 14

Citizenship of a corporation

Back 14

A corporation is deemed to be a citizen of any state in which it is incorporated and of the state in which it has its principal place of business

1) incorporation

2) principal place of business ( corporate headquarters-the nerve center test; and where the corporation conducts most of its business - muscle test

Front 15

Unincorporated association (labor unions, partnerships, religious, or charitable organizations)

Back 15

are citizens of each state where a member is domicled

Front 16

In an action against an estate?

Back 16

The estate is deemed a citizen of the same state as the decedent the state in which the decendent was domiciled at the time dealth

Front 17

Class Action

Back 17

Only the citizenship of the named class representative is considered in determining diversity

Front 18

When is diversity of citizenship determined?

Back 18

Diversity of citizenship of the parties is determined as of the time the action is commenced. Diversity need not continue after the suit is commenced

Front 19

Supplemental Jurisdiction

Back 19

Under Federal case law, federal courts determined that they had the power to hear certain non federal, non diversity claims, in order that the entire controversy may be adjudicated in one federal lawsuit rather than multiple lawsuits.

Front 20

Finley gives states discretion to decline to exercise all forms of supplemental jurisdiction where:

Back 20

1) the claim raises a noval or complex issue of state law

2) the claim subtantially predominates over the claims or claims over which the district court has original jurisdiction

3) the district court has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisidiction

4) There are other compelling reasons for declining jurisdiction

Front 21

Exam note re: supplemental jurisdiction

Back 21

Supplemental jurisdiction is needed to support a particular claim only where that claim does not have an independent basis of subject matter jurisdiction. Thus, carefully check each claim given to you in the facts and ask yourself whether that particular claim is supported by either federal question or diversity jurisdiction

Front 22

Pendent jurisdiction

Back 22

Plaintiff asserts a federal claim against a defendant and has also jointed with the federal claim a state claim against the same defendant that is related to the federal claim

For the court to have the statutory power to hear the state claim:

1) The federal claim must be substantial
2) the federal and state claim must be so related that they form part of the same case and controversy
3) state may exercise its discretion to decline to exercise the power and dismiss the state claim in situations

Front 23

Pendent Party Jurisdiction

Back 23

Typical scenario: plaintiff asserts a federal claim against one defendant and has joined a related state claim against an additonal but non diverse defendant:

limitation - cannot exercise pendent party jursidiction against D2 where the only basis for the court's SMJ over th claim against D1 is diversity

Front 24

Ancillary Jurisdiction

Back 24

The ancillary claim must be so related to the main claim that they form part of the same case or controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution (case law rule statement: the ancillary claim must be logically related to the aggregate cor of operative facts which constitutes the main claim.

Front 25

Limitation an ancillary jurisdiction

Back 25

Where the only basis for subject matter jurisdiction over the main claim is diversity jursidiction the court cannot assert ancillary jurisidiction over the following claims:

Front 26

Is the statute of limitation tolled as to claims when supplemental claim is asserted?

Back 26

Yes.

Front 27

Direct Attack

Back 27

Defendant may challenge subject matter jurisdiction through a pre-answer motion or in the answer or at any other time during the lawsuit, including appeal.

Front 28

Collateral Attachk

Back 28

In the absence of extraordinary circumstances defendant cannot collaterally attack subject matter jurisdiction in a subsequent proceeding.

Front 29

Removal Jurisdiction

Back 29

Where the plaintiff has brought suite in state court, the removal statute permits the defendant to force the case to be transferred to federal district court only if the case could have been originally brought in a federal court.

Front 30

Personal Jurisdiction

Back 30

Personal Jurisidiction is the power or authority of a court to render a judgment that binds the person of the defendant. The means by which a plaintiff seeks to assert personal jurisdiction is to serve a summons on the defendant, service of summons is the means by which the court symbolically seized the defendant's person

Front 31

Personal Service

Back 31

On the defendant while physically present in the territory of the forum state.

In State service of process on a non-resident defendant who is only briefly in the forum state was confirmed by the US supreme court as a constitutionnally permissible basis for personal jurisdiction

Front 32

Domicile

Back 32

Service of process on a domicilairy (citizen) of the forum state even while he is outside the forum state is constitutional

Front 33

Consent

Back 33

Defendant may waive his right under the Due Process Clause and consent to personal juridiction.

Front 34

Express Consent

Back 34

Express consent provision in a contract- a defendant may consent in advance to personal jurisidiction in an otherwise valid contract, or to the appointment on behalf of the defendant on an agent for service of process who may be served in the forum state.

Front 35

Implied Consent

Back 35

International Shoe- this legal fiction was used to uphold the constitutionally of state implied consent statutes which authorized state courts to assert personal jurisdiction over non-resident corporation and over non-resident individuals who committed torts within the forum state.

Front 36

The Minimum Contacts

Back 36

Due Process requires only that in order to subject a defendant to a judgment in personam if he be not present within the territory of the forum, he have certain minimum contacts with it such that the maintenance of the suit does not offent traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.

Front 37

Purposeful Availment

Back 37

The US Supreme Court declared that only purposeful acts or conduct (purposeful contacts)directed by the non resident defendant at the forum state could support personal jurisidiction under the Due Process Clause

Front 38

Assess the frequency and regularity of defendant's purposeful contacts

Back 38

The more frequent and regular defendant's activitiies with the forum state, the more likely it is that the court will find that defendant should have reasonably expected to be sued ther and thus find purposeful availment.

Front 39

Single Conduct?

Back 39

Even a single contact or isolated or occassional contacts could satisfy the purposeful availment requirement if the nature and quality of the contacts have a sufficiently strong impact on the forum state and the cause of action arises directly out of that contact

Front 40

Continious and systemic

Back 40

Frequency - if the defendant engages in continuous and systematic activity with the forum state which is so substantial and or such a strong nature and quality the forum state's court may assert personal jurisdiction even if the cause of action does not relate to that activity. This kind of personal juridiction is known as general rule.

Front 41

Fair play and substantial justice

Back 41

Litigation Fairness

Front 42

Must there be a statute the authorize personal jurisdiction

Back 42

The state court must also authorize by a state juridiciation statute

Front 43

Res Judicate (Claim Preclusion)

Back 43

A valid and final judgment on the merits of a clain or cause of action precluded reassertion of that claim or cause of action in a subsequent action between the same parties or their privies, even as to claims that should have been but were not raised in the former case
Elements
...judgment for B
1) Valid (enforceable)
2) Final (final determination)
3) on the merits (based on the evidence)no- defaults, involuntary dismissal

Precludes action upon same cause of action between the same parties or their privies

(bring motion for summary judgment)

Front 44

Scope of the Cause of Action

Back 44

Bars relitigation of same cause of action, also bars ligitation of what should have been included in the first action.....(federal Court - same transaction)

Front 45

Collateral Estoppel (Issue Preclusion)

Back 45

Where the second lawsuit involves a different claim, the first judgment may be invoked as to all issues, which where actually litigated and determined in the first action and necessarily determined
elements
1) Identical Issue
2) Actually litigation and determination
3) Necessarily determined
4) Full and Fair opportunity to litigation

Front 46

Exceptions to issue preclusions

Back 46

1) change in facts - evidence relating to it has changed significantly since the prior judgment

2) burden of proof