Civil Procedure Flashcards (73 Cards)

Under 28 U.S.C. 1331, when the plaintiff’s claim arises under federal law. The federal issue must appear on the face of a well-pleaded complaint—an anticipated federal defense or a federal counterclaim does not create jurisdiction.

There must be complete diversity (no plaintiff shares a state of citizenship with any defendant) and an amount in controversy exceeding 75,000 dollars. Citizenship is measured when the suit is filed.

An individual is a citizen of the state of domicile (residence plus intent to remain). A corporation is a citizen of every state of incorporation and the one state of its principal place of business (the nerve center where officers direct activities).

The plaintiff’s good-faith claim controls unless it is legally certain recovery cannot exceed 75,000 dollars. A single plaintiff may aggregate all claims against a single defendant. Separate plaintiffs or claims against separate defendants generally cannot aggregate unless enforcing a common undivided interest.

When additional claims share a common nucleus of operative fact with an anchor claim (same case or controversy). In diversity cases, 1367(b) bars supplemental jurisdiction over claims by plaintiffs against parties joined under Rules 14, 19, 20, or 24 if it would destroy complete diversity.

A defendant may remove if the case could originally have been filed in federal court. Removal must occur within 30 days, all defendants must consent, and in a diversity case removal is barred if any defendant is a citizen of the forum state. Diversity cases cannot be removed more than one year after filing absent bad faith.

The plaintiff moves to remand the case to state court. A defect other than lack of subject-matter jurisdiction must be raised within 30 days of removal, but lack of subject-matter jurisdiction may be raised at any time before final judgment.

Presence (served while physically in the forum), domicile in the forum, consent (express, implied, or by appearance), and voluntary appearance. These satisfy due process without a separate minimum-contacts analysis.

A long-arm statute is the state law authorizing a court to reach out-of-state defendants. The court must satisfy both the statute and the constitutional due-process limits. Some long-arm statutes extend to the full reach of due process.

The defendant must have minimum contacts with the forum such that jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. The defendant must have purposefully availed itself of the forum so that being haled into court there is foreseeable.

Specific jurisdiction exists when the claim arises out of or relates to the defendant’s forum contacts. General (all-purpose) jurisdiction allows any claim and exists only where the defendant is at home—for an individual, the domicile; for a corporation, its place of incorporation and principal place of business.

Merely placing a product into the stream of commerce that ends up in the forum is generally insufficient. The defendant must engage in additional conduct targeting the forum, such as designing the product for that market, advertising there, or establishing channels to serve forum customers.

Notice must be reasonably calculated, under all the circumstances, to apprise interested parties of the action and afford them an opportunity to be heard. The method must be reasonable even if actual receipt does not occur.

By personal delivery, by leaving copies at the defendant’s usual abode with a resident of suitable age and discretion, by delivery to an authorized agent, or by any method allowed under the law of the state where the court sits or where service is made. A nonparty over 18 must serve.

Under Rule 4(d), a defendant who returns a waiver gets 60 days (rather than 21) to respond. A defendant in the U.S. who declines to waive without good cause must bear the costs of later formal service.

Under 28 U.S.C. 1391, in a district where any defendant resides if all defendants reside in the same state, or where a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred. A fallback provision applies if no district qualifies.

1404(a) permits transfer from a proper venue to another proper district for convenience and the interest of justice; the transferee court applies the transferor’s choice-of-law rules. 1406(a) applies when venue is improper, allowing transfer or dismissal, and the transferee applies its own choice-of-law rules.

When the most appropriate forum is in a different judicial system (such as a foreign country) where transfer is impossible. The court weighs private and public interest factors and dismisses, conditioning dismissal on the defendant’s submission to the alternative forum.

A federal court sitting in diversity applies federal procedural law but the substantive law of the forum state, including its statutes of limitations and choice-of-law rules. There is no general federal common law.

If a valid Federal Rule directly conflicts, the Rule controls so long as it is procedural under the Rules Enabling Act. Absent an on-point federal rule, the court asks whether applying federal law would encourage forum shopping or cause inequitable administration; if so, state law applies.

Under Klaxon, the federal court applies the choice-of-law rules of the state in which it sits, ensuring the outcome matches what a state court would reach.

A short and plain statement showing entitlement to relief. Under Twombly and Iqbal, the factual allegations must state a claim that is plausible on its face; the court disregards conclusory allegations and asks whether the well-pleaded facts permit a reasonable inference of liability.

Fraud and mistake must be stated with particularity (the who, what, when, where, and how). However, malice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of mind may be alleged generally.

By signing a filing, an attorney certifies it is not for an improper purpose, that legal contentions are warranted, and that factual contentions have evidentiary support. A motion for sanctions must be served first, giving a 21-day safe harbor to withdraw the offending paper.

Defenses that defeat the claim even if the plaintiff’s allegations are true, such as statute of limitations, res judicata, and assumption of risk. They must be pleaded in the answer or are generally waived.

A party may amend once as a matter of course within 21 days after serving it, or within 21 days after a responsive pleading or Rule 12 motion. Otherwise leave of court is required, which is granted freely when justice so requires.

Under Rule 15(c), when the amendment asserts a claim arising from the same conduct, transaction, or occurrence. Changing a defendant relates back only if, within the service period, the new party received notice and knew the action would have been brought against it but for a mistake.

A compulsory counterclaim arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the opposing party’s claim and is waived if not asserted. A permissive counterclaim is unrelated and may be brought in this or a separate action, but it needs its own jurisdictional basis.

A cross-claim is asserted against a co-party and must arise from the same transaction or occurrence as the original action. Cross-claims are always permissive, never compulsory.

A defending party may bring in a nonparty who is or may be liable to the defendant for all or part of the plaintiff’s claim—a theory of indemnity or contribution. The third party cannot be impleaded simply because it is liable to the plaintiff directly.

A party is necessary (required) if complete relief is impossible without it or its interest may be impaired. If joinder destroys jurisdiction, the court decides under 19(b) whether the party is indispensable—if so, the case is dismissed; if not, it proceeds without that party.

Plaintiffs or defendants may join when claims arise from the same transaction or occurrence and share a common question of law or fact. Joinder is optional, allowing related parties to litigate together for efficiency.

Intervention of right when the movant has an interest that may be impaired and is not adequately represented. Permissive intervention when the movant’s claim shares a common question of law or fact and intervention will not unduly delay the case.

Interpleader lets a stakeholder force competing claimants to a fund to litigate among themselves. Statutory interpleader needs only minimal diversity and 500 dollars; Rule 22 interpleader requires complete diversity and more than 75,000 dollars or a federal question.

Numerosity (joinder impracticable), commonality (common questions), typicality (representative claims typical of the class), and adequacy (representatives will fairly protect the class). The class must also fit a 23(b) category.

(b)(1) risk of inconsistent or impairing adjudications; (b)(2) defendant acted on grounds applicable to the class, warranting injunctive or declaratory relief; (b)(3) common questions predominate and a class action is superior. Only (b)(3) classes get notice and opt-out rights.

CAFA grants federal jurisdiction over class actions with minimal diversity (any class member diverse from any defendant), an aggregate amount exceeding 5 million dollars, and at least 100 class members.

Parties may discover any nonprivileged matter relevant to a claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case. Information need not be admissible to be discoverable, but it must meet the relevance-and-proportionality test.

Materials prepared in anticipation of litigation are protected. Ordinary work product is discoverable on a showing of substantial need and undue hardship, but a lawyer’s mental impressions and legal theories receive near-absolute protection.

Testifying experts must provide a written report and may be deposed; draft reports and most attorney-expert communications are protected. Consulting (non-testifying) experts are generally not discoverable absent exceptional circumstances.

Under Rule 37, a court may compel responses and, for noncompliance, order sanctions ranging from cost-shifting to establishing facts, striking pleadings, or default. For lost electronically stored information, severe sanctions require a finding of intent to deprive.

The defenses of lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, insufficient process, and insufficient service are waived if available but not raised in the first Rule 12 motion or responsive pleading. Failure to state a claim and failure to join an indispensable party may be raised later, and subject-matter jurisdiction is never waived.

After a defendant fails to respond, the clerk enters a default. The clerk may enter judgment for a sum certain; otherwise the court enters it, often after a hearing. A defaulted party who appeared must receive 7 days notice of the judgment application.

A plaintiff may dismiss without a court order once before the opponent answers or moves for summary judgment. A second voluntary dismissal of the same claim operates as an adjudication on the merits (the two-dismissal rule).

Judgment is granted when there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court views evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and does not weigh credibility.

In legal (not equitable) actions, preserving the right as it existed in 1791. When a case mixes legal and equitable claims, the legal issues are tried to a jury first, preserving the right to jury determination of common fact questions.

A court grants JMOL (formerly directed verdict) when a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient basis to find for the nonmovant. To make a renewed JMOL after verdict, the party must have moved for JMOL before the case went to the jury.

For errors affecting substantial rights—such as a verdict against the clear weight of the evidence, excessive or inadequate damages, prejudicial error, juror misconduct, or newly discovered evidence. The court may also order a new trial conditioned on remittitur.

Under 28 U.S.C. 1291, a party may appeal only from a final judgment that ends the litigation on the merits, leaving nothing but execution. Interlocutory orders are generally not immediately appealable.

Appeals of orders granting or denying injunctions (1292(a)), discretionary certified questions involving a controlling issue (1292(b)), Rule 54(b) certification in multi-claim cases, and mandamus in extraordinary situations.

When the order conclusively determines a disputed question, resolves an issue separate from the merits, and would be effectively unreviewable on appeal from final judgment, such as a denial of absolute or qualified immunity.

A valid final judgment on the merits, the same claim or cause of action (same transaction), and the same parties or their privies. It bars relitigation of claims that were or could have been raised in the first action.

Dismissals for failure to state a claim, summary judgment, and after trial are on the merits. Dismissals for lack of jurisdiction, improper venue, or failure to join a party are not, and do not preclude refiling.

The issue was actually litigated and determined, the determination was essential to a valid final judgment, and the party against whom preclusion is asserted had a full and fair opportunity to litigate it. It bars relitigation of the specific issue, not the whole claim.

Issue preclusion may now be used nonmutually against a party who litigated and lost. Defensive nonmutual use is freely allowed; offensive nonmutual use is permitted only if fair—the prior judgment must be reliable and the new plaintiff could not easily have joined the earlier suit. Preclusion never binds a nonparty who had no opportunity to litigate.

Decedent's estate, minor, or incompetent takes the citizenship of the represented party, not the rep. Permanent-resident aliens are treated as citizens of their state of domicile; a suit between two aliens (no U.S. citizen on either side) defeats diversity.

One plaintiff may aggregate all claims against one defendant (related or not). Multiple plaintiffs or multiple defendants cannot aggregate separate claims unless enforcing a single common/undivided interest. Counterclaims and interest/costs are generally excluded.

Court may decline §1367(c) supplemental jurisdiction where the state claim raises a novel/complex issue, substantially predominates, all federal claims are dismissed, or other compelling reasons. Tolls the state SoL while pending plus 30 days after dismissal.

File in federal court for the district embracing the state action; do not seek state-court permission. Remand for any defect within 30 days; remand for lack of SMJ anytime. Forum-defendant rule bars diversity removal; no such bar for federal-question cases.

A valid Federal Rule on point controls over conflicting state law if it is arguably procedural and within the Rules Enabling Act (no abridgment of substantive rights). Only when no federal directive applies do you reach outcome-determinative analysis weighed against the twin aims (forum-shopping and inequitable administration).

§1404(a) transfer for convenience to a proper venue: the transferee court applies the transferor's choice-of-law rules (Van Dusen). §1406 transfer from an improper venue: the transferee court applies its own law.

Due process requires notice reasonably calculated under the circumstances to apprise interested parties (Mullane). Service by publication is generally inadequate where the party's address is known or reasonably ascertainable.

Clerk may enter default judgment only if the claim is for a sum certain, defendant defaulted, and is not a minor/incompetent. Otherwise the court enters it (and may hold a hearing on damages). Set aside for good cause (default) or under Rule 60(b) (default judgment).

Plaintiff may dismiss once without prejudice before the answer/SJ motion; a second voluntary dismissal of the same claim operates with prejudice (two-dismissal rule). Involuntary dismissal (Rule 41(b)) is on the merits unless for jurisdiction, venue, or failure to join.

Mnemonic "LIB-P": Likelihood of success · Irreparable harm · Balance of hardships · Public interest. TRO may issue ex parte for up to 14 days (one extension) with security; preliminary injunction requires notice and a hearing.

Testifying experts' reports and depositions are discoverable; consulting (non-testifying) experts are protected absent exceptional circumstances. Draft expert reports and most attorney-expert communications are work product. ESI need not be produced if not reasonably accessible due to undue burden/cost (good-cause override).

Object to instructions before the jury retires to preserve error. Verdict forms: general, special, or general-with-interrogatories. Peremptory strikes may not be exercised on the basis of race or gender (Batson/J.E.B.).

Generally only final judgments are appealable (28 days for new-trial/JMOL motions tolls the 30-day appeal clock). Exceptions: certified interlocutory appeals (§1292(b)), injunction orders (§1292(a)(1)), collateral-order doctrine, Rule 54(b) entry, and class-certification (Rule 23(f)).

Questions of law reviewed de novo; findings of fact reviewed for clear error; discretionary rulings (e.g., evidentiary, discovery) reviewed for abuse of discretion. Harmless-error doctrine prevents reversal absent prejudice.

Claim and issue preclusion bind only parties and those in privity; a stranger to the prior judgment is generally not bound (due process). Nonmutual offensive collateral estoppel is allowed only where it is fair and the defendant had a full and fair opportunity to litigate.

Trigger: A party seeks emergency relief to preserve the status quo before final judgment.
To obtain a preliminary injunction, the movant must show a likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm absent relief, that the balance of equities tips in its favor, and that an injunction serves the public interest, and the court ordinarily requires the movant to post security. A temporary restraining order may issue, sometimes ex parte, to prevent immediate and irreparable injury, but it lasts no more than 14 days unless extended for good cause or by consent. Unlike a TRO, a preliminary injunction requires notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Trigger: A plaintiff seeks to drop a suit, or a defendant moves to dismiss for failure to prosecute or comply with the rules.
A plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss without a court order by filing a notice before the opponent serves an answer or a summary-judgment motion, and the first such dismissal is without prejudice; a second voluntary dismissal of the same claim operates as an adjudication on the merits. After that point, dismissal requires a court order or the parties' stipulation. An involuntary dismissal for failure to prosecute or to comply with the rules or a court order generally operates as an adjudication on the merits and is with prejudice unless the court states otherwise.

Trigger: A defendant fails to respond to the complaint within the time allowed.
When a defendant fails to plead or otherwise defend, the clerk must enter a default on the plaintiff's request. The clerk may enter a default judgment only when the claim is for a sum certain and the defendant did not appear; otherwise the plaintiff must apply to the court, and a defendant who has appeared is entitled to seven days' written notice before any hearing. A default judgment may not differ in kind from, or exceed in amount, what was demanded in the pleadings, and the court may set aside an entry of default for good cause and a judgment under the standards of Rule 60(b).