civpro midterm

subject matter jurisdiction

the authority hear the type of dispute

States

have very board SMJ

Concurrent jurisdiction

when a case can have exist in both state and federal level

Citizenship of a state

determined the day filed

Common law concept of domicile

resident with intent to remain indefinitely

need to arrive at new domicile before losing old domicile

if you stay at state for indefinite period, then they acquire a domicile

Indefinitely

intends to make the new state home and the person has no present intention of going elsewhere to live

Individual Diversity Jurisdiction

needs to exist on the day the complaint is filed

party asserting diversity bears the burden of proof

requires damages exceeding $75k

Original Jurisdiction

can be filed from the start in court

Alienage Jurisdiction

the constitution & congress allow for federal courts to hear such case as long as it meets diversity jurisdiction requirements

“complete diversity” rule

no plaintiff can be citizen of the same state as any defendant

diverse across the V

Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction

not broad

no minimum amount needed

can remand or dismiss for subject matter jurisdiction at ANY TIME

Federal Subject Matter Jurisdiction Requirements

The constitutional must confer subject matter jurisdiction on the federal court AND

congress must provide subject matter jurisdiction by statute

Federal Question Statute

The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the constitution, laws, or treaties of the US

Arising Under

Federal issue needs to appear in complaint & they are enough to state a proper claim for relief

Well Pleaded Complaint Rule

the federal question must appear on the face of the properly pleaded complaint

• does not count as a federal question if raised in counter claim or defense

Holmes Test

Whether those allegations assert a right of relief created by federal law

Grable Test

test to see if there is an embedded federal question in a claim

Grable Factors

Necessarily Raised

Actually disputed

Substantial

Capable of Resolution in Federal Courts without disrupting federal-state balance

Grable Factors: Substantial

look at what would this answer do to the federal law and what other courts would do with it

Grable Factors: Capable of Resolution in Federal Courts without disrupting federal-state balance

would the court create a new type of cases?

Personal Jurisdiction

a court must have the authority to require the defendant to appear in the forum and defend the action there

What limits court’s authority to personal jurisdiction?

1. Due Process Clause (14th amendment)

2. Long Arm Provision

Long Arm Provision

usually enumerated and say can limit or give unlimited ability to personal jurisdiction up to the limit of the constitution

Personam Jurisdiction

exist if the court has the authority to require the defendant to appear personally, and defend the case in the state where the suit was brought

Pennoyer’s presence definition

the individual needs to be physically presence in the state

International Shoe Co. v. Washington presence definition

Form two ways

Claim arising out of defendant’s deliberate contact with the state

Defendant has ongoing contactsin the state

General Jurisdiction

which contacts exist for individuals when they are domiciled in a particular state and can be sued in the forum even if the claim arose elsewhere

Specific Jurisdiction

if the claim arises out of the defendant’s deliberate contact with the state

Establishing specific jurisdiction (Worldwide Volkswagen)

exists when:

defendant has contacts in forum

Claim arose out of those contacts

Exercise of personal jurisdiction is otherwise “fair and reasonable”

Reasonableness Factors for Specific Jurisdiction

Burden on the defendant

forum state interest

plaintiff interest in a convenient forum

interstate judicial system’s interest in efficient resolution of controversies

shared interests of several state in furthering substantive social policies

Stream of Commerce - O’Connor

there must be additional activity directed at state before contact exist

Stream of Commerce - Brennan

has contact with any forum where the defendant knows that the final product is sold

Stream of Commerce - Stevens

need to look at volume of sales and other metrics to determine if stream of commerce is enough

Personal Jurisdiction is fair & reasonable

Is it within constitutional limits the long arm statute extends? OR

are the alleged actions within the actions listed in the long arms statute enumerated actions?

Calder’s Effect

used in libel or slander case to determine if it the personal jurisdiction is constitutional

Calder’s Effect Elements

personal jurisdiction can be established (in part at least) if the effects can be felt in the forum state, intended/deliberately direct wrongdoing at a state

they can reasonably anticipate being hauled into court in those states

Analyzing Personal Jurisdiction

Personal Jurisdiction is fair and reasonable

plaintiff claim arose out of (or sufficiently related to) those contacts; and consider

is the exercise of the PH otherwise fair and reasonable such that it comports with traditional notions of “fair play and substantial justice”?

Elements of Arising out of

whether the claim result from the defendant’s in state contacts AND

whether there is a strong relationship among the defendant, the forum and the litigation

Personal Jurisdiction Reasonableness Factors

burdens on D appearing in the state

interest of the forum state

plaintiff interest in obtaining relief

interstate judicial system interest in obtaining the most efficient resolution of controversies

shared interest in furthering fundamental substantive social policies

Challenging Personal Jurisdiction

Special Appearance

Direct Challenge

Collateral Attack

Interlocutory Appeal

Special Appearance

an appearance for the exclusive purpose of challenging personal jurisdiction

Direct Challenge

should be done in the first responsive pleading

Collateral Attack

wait for the other party to attempt to enforce a default judgement then attack judgement as void for lack of personal jurisdiction

Interlocutory Appeal

process of appealing an issue in the middle of a cases, some state allowed defendants to do so on personal jurisdiction

Removal Statute

allows the defendant to choose a federal forum by removing to federal court

Removal Process

file notice of removal in federal courts and notify plaintiff & state courts

When does Removal need to be done?

must be within 30 days of initial pleading or being service with process in the action

Diversity Cases Removal Period

have an outer limit of 1 year for removal, does not apply if plaintiff acted in bad faith

Home State Defendant

exception to diversity case removal

if you have complete diversity but it is filed in the defendant’s home state, cannot remove

Multiple Defendant Removals

every defendant added has 30 days from being served to remove, does not add to prior defendant’s 30 day period

Subject Matter Jurisdiction Determination

Date of Removal

Motion to Remand

when the plaintiff believes defense did not use the proper procedure to remove, they can move in the federal court to remand the action to the state courts

• can be done any time before final judgement regarding diversity SMJ

• must be done within 30 days

Forum Shopping

the choice of a court for some strategic advantage that may be important

Limit Removal Methods

Alleging state law b/c cause of action in nondiverse cases

sue in state defendant

suing nondiverse parties

having damages < $75k

Forum Selection Clause

a different & more important contract provision for personal jurisdiction purpose

long arm statute

statutes that will give courts authority to exercise personal jurisdiction, can go as far as the constitution

define how much personal jurisdiction authority a court should have

Limited Long Arm Statutes

enumerated list

General Long Arm Statutes

whatever constitution allows

Specialized Long Arm Statute

addresses narrow ranges of types of cases

Pennoyer v. Neff

defines limits of Personal Jurisdiction over out of state defendants, established domicile and required consent and in state presence

Hess

defined implied consent that when you enter a state you consent to the defending suits arising from that state

International Shoe

establishes that for specific jurisdiction, the claim needs to arise out of deliberate contact with a state and defendant has ongoing contacts with the state

McGee

Farthest court has gone with specific jurisdiction, brings up reasonableness factors for the first time

Worldwide Volkswagen

Establishes entire test:

defendant has purposeful or deliberate contact with forum state

claim arose out of contracts and

personal jurisdiction is reasonable based on reasonableness factors

Asahi

discusses stream of commerce

Shaffer

For in Rem and Quasi in Rem cases, minimum contacts must still be applied

Burnham

establishes transient presence does not require contacts test, since physical presence and consent establishes personal jurisdiction as stated in Pennoyer.

Mallory

can only get corporation two ways: general and specific personal jurisdiction

Waiver

results from a party’s failure to raise an issue within a specified time or in a proper manner

Consent

defendant can choose not to raise issue of personal jurisdiction

Consent by Conduct

by filing a claim, plaintiff consents to court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over any counterclaims that the defendant might allege against the plaintiff

Transient Jurisdiction

in state service of process on an individual establishes personal jurisdiction for the individual even if just passing through

Daimler

establishes a corporation is at home wherever it has its principal place of business or place of incorporation, affiliation had to be so “continuous and systematic”

Ford

contact now needs to arise from actions of defendant or they have to be sufficiently related to the defendant.

Burdick

contact with a state needs to be expressly aimed or intentionally targeted

Service of Process Functions

formally assert court’s authority over defendant

inform them of the case

Due Process Federal Constraint

fifth amendment

Due Process State Constraint

14th amendment

Mullane

establish broad constitutional service standards

Due Process Requirements

Notice is reasonably calculated to afford an opportunity to present objections

the mean employment must reasonable accomplish informing reciepient

Commonsense requirement

defendant needs to be adequately inform that the court intended to adjudicate her right

Mullane takeaways

burden is on person filing the suit to give reasonable notice to other party to contest

Publication

is not enough for service of process if you know where the party is

Methods to Serve Summons & Complaints

personally

leave a dwelling or usually place of abode with someone of suitable age and discretion

deliver summon to an an agent

follow rules of service of process of the state where court sits

Service Outset

21 days from being served, before answer or with answer

Serving Requirements

Not a party

18 or more years old

if P asks: Marshall

Summon

court is calling and telling you to respond

Summons Rule

4(a)

Service time period

90 days of filing

4(d)

service waiver

4(e)

how to serve individual

4(h)

how to serve corporation

Ufner

establish substantial to mean broad, looks to see if event is a part of claim predicate broadly

28 USC 1406

allows for dismissal or transfers

used with improper venues

Choice of law from initial venue applies

1404

Choice of law of new venue applies

1406

28 USC 1404

allows for transfers

used with proper venues

Forun non conveniens

can be used to dismiss proper venues

looks at private and public factors

Private factors

plaintiff choice of forum, unless balance of convenience is STRONGLY in favor of D

choice of forum

whether claim arose elsewhere

convenience of parties, witnesses

ease of access