Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure

Front 1

Can a federal trial court judge order a pretrial conference to encourage settlement, then sanction a party that fails to attend?

Back 1

The Federal Rules give the court the power to call one or more pretrial conferences for a variety of reasons as necessary to expedite trial and foster settlement. Moreover, this conference is to be attended by at least one of the lawyers for each side who will actually be conducting the trial, and by any unrepresented parties. A party or counsel may be sanctioned for failure to attend a conference or obey an order entered pursuant to the conference. Additionally, the court must require the disobedient party or counsel to pay expenses incurred (including attorneys' fees) by other parties unless the court finds that circumstances make such an award unjust.

Front 2

If you file a complaint before the SOL expires, but then amend to add a claim after the SOL expires, does it relate back?

Back 2

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 states that leave of court (to grant motions to amend) is to be "freely given when justice so requires." The rule does not provide any clear date when amendments are no longer permissible, although later amendments obviously would be less fair and less likely to be considered in the interest of justice. Additionally, for statute of limitations purposes, proposed claims may be considered to "relate back" to the date of the original pleading in which the claim was made under Rule 15(c).

Front 3

If a lawyer files a complaint well beyond the SOL based on a mistaken belief that a longer SOL applies, can he be sanctioned?

Back 3

The attorney may be sanctioned. In signing a pleading, the attorney represents, among other things, that he has made a reasonable inquiry into the factual and legal grounds for the pleadings.

Front 4

When does the Seventh Amendment provide a right to a jury trial?

Back 4

The Seventh Amendment provides the right to a jury trial in federal courts for the determination of facts in all suits at common law where the amount in controversy exceeds $20.

Front 5

Who decides whether to use a special verdict form, a general verdict form, or a general verdict form with special interrogatories?

Back 5

In federal court, the decision as to whether a general verdict, special verdict, or general verdict with special interrogatories will be used is determined by the trial court in its discretion.

Front 6

If a federal jury's verdict is challenged for excessiveness, what standard will apply?

Back 6

The Supreme Court requires that federal trial courts considering a motion for a new trial based on the excessiveness of the verdict apply a state law standard.

Front 7

When can a court consolidate two separate cases?

Back 7

Federal Rule 42(a) allows the court to consolidate actions then before it only when the actions have a common question of law or fact.

Front 8

If state law would not supply a jury trial in a federal diversity case, must the federal court still supply a jury?

Back 8

Yes. In a diversity suit "at common law" in federal court, the court must permit a jury trial even thoughthe state court would determine that no right to a jury trial exists. In other words, the right to a jury trial in federal court is governed entirely by federal law, without regard to whether the case would be tried to a jury in state court.

Front 9

Can a jury's verdict find for plaintiff for "actual damages suffered"?

Back 9

If a jury simply finds for the plaintiff "for actual damages suffered," the verdict shows on its face that the jury did not follow the court's instructions, in which case the verdict may be set aside and either the jury will be asked to reconsider the verdict or a new trial will be ordered.

Front 10

If a defending party timely serves a formal offer to have judgment entered against it on specific terms, it is deemed a valid offer unless ______________________.

Back 10

If a defending party timely serves a formal offer to have judgment entered against it on specific terms, it is deemed a valid offer unless it explicitly or implicitly excludes costs.

Front 11

The time period under Rule 68 for when a party defending against a claim or counterclaim may serve a formal offer to have judgment entered against it on specified terms is ________________________.

Back 11

at least 14 days before (i) trial or (ii) a hearing on damages (after the offering party has been determined to be liable)

Front 12

A new trial may be granted when the verdict is:

Back 12

EXCESSIVE, INADEQUATE OR AGAINST WEight OF EVIDENCE

Front 13

A renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law may be filed:

Back 13

No later than 28 days after the entry of judgment

Front 14

The Supreme Court has held that when legal and equitable claims are joined in one action:

Back 14

The legal claim should be tried first to the jury and then the equitable claim should be decided by the court

Front 15

When a jury delivers a verdict that is clearly based on a compromise by the jurors:

Back 15

The verdict may be set aside and either the jury will be asked to reconsider the verdict or a new trial will be ordered

Front 16

The court must find that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient basis to find for the party against whom the judgment is entered in order to enter a judgment on:

Back 16

a motion for JMOL or a renewed motion for JMOL

Front 17

When can multiple plaintiffs join together to sue a single defendant? When can they sue multiple defendants?

Back 17

When their claims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence and share a common question.

AND they have FQ or diversity jurisdiction.

Front 18

Who is a necessary party?

Back 18

An absentee who:

(1) without them, the court cannot accord complete relief among existing parties (worried about multiple suits); OR

(2) their interest may be harmed if he is not joined; OR

(3) they claim an interest that subjects a party (usually D) to a risk of multiple obligations.

Front 19

Are joint tortfeasors necessary parties?

Back 19

NEVER.

Front 20

How do you determine whether or not someone can be joined?

Back 20

Are they necessary?

Is joinder feasible (i.e., is there PJ and will it not destroy SMJ)?

Front 21

If someone cannot be joined b/c it will destroy SMJ or there's no PJ, what happens?

Back 21

Court either (1) proceeds without them or (2) dismisses entire case. If court dismisses, then party is considered an indispensable party.

Weigh these:

Is there an alternative forum?

What is the likelihood of harm to you?

Can court shape relief to avoid harm to you?

Front 22

When can you use impleader? When are impleader claims compulsory?

Back 22

D can only do this to shift his own liability to P; so he shifts the TPD to pay all or part of his liability. Usually for indemnity (full claim) or contribution (pro rata portion).

NOTE: D must be liable!!! If he claims he's not liable - that it was someone else's fault - then he cannot use impleader.

NEVER compulsory.