Civil Procedure: Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Personal Jurisdiction & Related Doctrines

Subject-Matter Jurisdiction

• Presumption:
\text{No SMJ unless pled; burden on proponent}
; cannot be waived. This means the plaintiff must affirmatively allege facts supporting SMJ in the complaint, and the court has an independent obligation to verify SMJ, which cannot be created by agreement of the parties.

• Principal statutory grants: federal question (§1331), diversity (§1332), supplemental (§1367), removal (§1441–1447), legislative courts (courts created by Congress under Article I of the Constitution for specific purposes, often with specialized jurisdiction, such as bankruptcy courts or the Court of Federal Claims).

• Abstention (Pullman, Burford, Younger, Colorado River) allows federal court to defer/stay proceedings where state law issues are unclear, state administrative processes are adequate, state criminal proceedings are pending, or to avoid piecemeal litigation in concurrent state/federal actions.

• Transfer when SMJ lacking → 28\,U.S.C.\,§1631 allows a federal court that lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to transfer the case to any other federal court where the action could have been brought, if it is in the interest of justice.

Federal Question (§1331)

• No amount-in-controversy or diversity requirement for claims arising under federal law.

• Arising-under if claim created by federal law (e.g., a claim under a federal statute like Title VII) or a state-law claim incorporating a federal issue that meets the (i) necessarily raised, (ii) actually disputed, (iii) substantial federal issue that (iv) won’t disturb fed-state balance (Gunn v. Minton) test. For example, a state tort claim might arise under federal law if a prime element of the claim requires interpreting federal patent law.

• Well-pleaded complaint rule: look only at plaintiff’s affirmative claim for relief, not at anticipated defenses or counterclaims that might raise a federal question. The federal issue must be essential to the plaintiff's case.

Diversity (§1332)

• Complete diversity + > $75,000 exclusive of interest/costs. Complete diversity means no plaintiff is a citizen of the same state as any defendant.

• Citizenship: individuals = domicile (physical presence + intent to remain indefinitely); corporations = state of incorporation + principal place of business (“nerve center,” which is typically where the corporation's high-level officers direct, control, and coordinate the corporation's activities); LLC/partnership = every member's citizenship.

• Exclusions: probate & domestic-relations matters (e.g., divorce, child custody, alimony) are traditionally excluded from federal diversity jurisdiction due to historical practice and state interest.

• Minimal diversity only for statutory interpleader (§1335) where two or more adverse claimants of diverse citizenship claim an interest in property; certain >\$5\,000\,000 class actions (Class Action Fairness Act, CAFA); Multiparty Multiforum (§1369) which applies to certain mass disasters causing 75 or more deaths.

• Amount aggregation: one π vs one Δ aggregate all claims (even unrelated claims); multiple parties aggregate only if enforcing a single title/right or common undivided interest (e.g., joint property owners seeking damages).

Supplemental (§1367)

• "Common nucleus of operative fact": A federal court can hear state law claims that do not have an independent basis for federal jurisdiction if they are so closely related to a claim that does have federal jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy.

• §1367(b): in diversity cases, no supplemental jurisdiction over certain claims by plaintiffs that defeat complete diversity requirements. This typically applies to claims by original plaintiffs against parties joined under Rules 14 (impleader), 19 (compulsory joinder), 20 (permissive joinder), or 24 (intervention) if exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would destroy diversity.

• Court may decline under §1367(c):

• Novel or complex state law issues.

• Predominance of state law claims over federal claims.

• Dismissal of the anchor (original federal) claim.

• Exceptional circumstances where there are other compelling reasons to decline.

Removal (§1441–§1447)

• Δ only; to federal district embracing state court: Only defendants can remove, and the case must be removed to the federal district court that geographically encompasses the state court where the action was originally filed.

• Home-state bar & 1-year cap for diversity removals:

• A defendant cannot remove a diversity case if any defendant is a citizen of the state where the action was brought (the "forum defendant rule").

• A diversity case generally cannot be removed more than one year after its commencement in state court, unless the plaintiff has acted in bad faith.

• Procedure:

• Notice of removal filed within 30 days of service of the pleading or summons that makes the case removable.

• All properly served Δs must consent to removal (except for separate and independent federal question claims).

• Automatic stay of state proceedings upon filing notice of removal.

• Remand for SMJ defect anytime, for procedural defect within 30 days of filing the notice of removal.

Personal Jurisdiction

• Traditional bases: Presence (if defendant is served with process while physically present in the forum state); Domicile (if defendant is domiciled in the forum state, regardless of where served); Consent (express consent, or implied consent, e.g., by appearing in court without challenging PJ).

• If absent → minimum contacts + no offense to fair play & substantial justice. This test requires the defendant to have sufficient connections with the forum state such that it is reasonable and fair to subject them to suit there. "Minimum contacts" relate to the defendant purposefully availing themselves of the benefits of the forum state's laws.

• Specific vs. general:

• Specific jurisdiction arises when the claim itself arises out of or relates to the defendant's specific contacts with the forum state.

• General jurisdiction allows a court to hear any claim against a defendant, regardless of where the claim arose, but only if the defendant is "at home" in the forum state (for corporations: state of incorporation and principal place of business; for individuals: domicile; exceptional cases typically involve alter ego or traditional bases).

• Long-arm statutes extend to constitutional limit in most states, meaning they allow courts to exercise PJ over non-residents to the full extent permitted by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

• Imputed contacts: Agents/employees' contacts can be imputed to their employer; partners' contacts to the partnership; alter-ego subsidiaries' contacts to the parent corporation (when the corporate veil can be pierced).

• Notice: Method reasonably calculated to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action and afford them an opportunity to present their objections (Mullane standard). This is a due process requirement.

Venue (§1391)

• Proper where:

• Any Δ resides, if all defendants reside in the same state.

• A substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is located.

• Fallback: if no other district qualifies, any district in which any defendant is subject to the court's personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.

• Transfer:

• §1404 (proper ➔ convenience): Allows transfer from a proper venue to another proper venue where the case might have been brought or to which all parties consent, for the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice.

• §1406 (improper venue): Allows transfer or dismissal when a case is filed in an improper venue.

• Forum non conveniens applies when the most convenient forum is a foreign country or a state court, allowing a federal court to dismiss a case even if it has jurisdiction and venue, based on a balancing of private and public interest factors.

Erie & Choice of Law

• Diversity: In diversity cases, a federal court must apply state substantive law (e.g., elements of a claim, statute of limitations) and federal procedural law (e.g., rules of evidence, pleading standards). The federal court must also apply the choice-of-law rules of the state in which it sits (Klaxon doctrine).

• If a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure is on point & valid under Rules Enabling Act → apply the Federal Rule. The Rules Enabling Act (28 U.S.C. §2072) states that Federal Rules shall not abridge, enlarge, or modify any substantive right. A Rule is valid if it regulates procedure.

• Else Erie balancing (when there is no Federal Rule directly on point):

• Outcome determination test: Would applying federal law instead of state law lead to a significantly different outcome?

• Byrd interest-weighing: Does the state rule involve a strong state interest or policy (e.g., a right to jury trial) that outweighs the federal interest in applying its own rules?

• Hanna twin aims: Designed to prevent forum shopping and inequitable administration of the laws. If applying federal rather than state law would encourage forum shopping or lead to unfairness between in-state and out-of-state litigants, then state law should apply.

Pleadings & Motions

• Complaint: Must contain (i) a statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction, (ii) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (iii) a demand for the relief sought.

• Rule 9 heightened pleading for fraud/mistake: Requires that a party alleging fraud or mistake must state with particularity the circumstances constituting the fraud or mistake (e.g., who, what, when, where, and how).

• Rule 12 defenses: Lack of Subject-Matter Jurisdiction (12(b)(1)), Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (12(b)(2)), Improper Venue (12(b)(3)), Insufficient Process (12(b)(4)), Insufficient Service of Process (12(b)(5)), Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted (12(b)(6)), Failure to Join a Party Under Rule 19 (12(b)(7)). PJ, venue, process, and service defenses are waived if not raised in defendant's first response (either a pre-answer motion or the answer).

• Rule 11: Signature certifies to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, that the pleading has no improper purpose, is warranted by law or by a non-frivolous argument for changing law, and has factual contentions with evidentiary support. Violations may lead to sanctions (e.g., monetary penalties, non-monetary directives). A party has a safe-harbor of 21 days to withdraw or correct the challenged pleading after being served with a Rule 11 motion before the motion can be filed with the court.

• Amendment as of right: A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within 21 days after serving it, or if a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or Rule 12 motion. Otherwise, amendment requires opposing party's written consent or court's leave, which should be "freely" given when justice so requires.

Joinder & Class Actions

• Rule 20 permissive joinder: Allows multiple plaintiffs to join in one action or multiple defendants to be joined, if their claims arise out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences AND involve any common question of law or fact.

• Rule 19 compulsory joinder (necessary/indispensable):

• Necessary party: A person required to be joined if feasible because their absence would prevent complete relief among existing parties, or their interest would be harmed, or an existing party would be subject to multiple/inconsistent obligations.

• Indispensable party: If a necessary party cannot be joined (e.g., due to lack of PJ or SMJ), the court must decide whether, in equity and good conscience, the action should proceed among the existing parties or be dismissed (i.e., the absent party is indispensable).

• Counterclaims: Claims asserted by a defendant against a plaintiff.

• Compulsory: Arises out of the same transaction or occurrence as the opposing party's claim; it must be pleaded or it is waived. No independent SMJ is required if it falls under supplemental jurisdiction.

• Permissive: Does not arise out of the same transaction or occurrence; it may be pleaded but is not waived if not. Requires its own basis for SMJ.

• Crossclaims: Claims asserted by one co-party against another co-party (e.g., defendant vs. co-defendant, plaintiff vs. co-plaintiff) if the claim arises out of the same transaction or occurrence as the original action or a counterclaim. Supplemental jurisdiction usually applies.

• Impleader Rule 14: A defending party (third-party plaintiff) may bring in a third party (third-party defendant) who may be liable to the original defendant for all or part of the plaintiff's claim against the original defendant (e.g., indemnification or contribution). Must be filed within 14 days after serving the original answer or with court's leave.

• Class Action Rule 23: Allows one or more members of a class to sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all members only if:

• Numerosity: The class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.

• Commonality: There are questions of law or fact common to the class.

• Typicality: The claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class.

• Adequacy: The representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.

• Fit in (b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(3) categories:

  • (b)(1) Risks of prejudice (e.g., inconsistent adjudications or impairment of non-parties' interests).

  • (b)(2) Injunctive/declaratory relief is appropriate for the class as a whole.

  • (b)(3) Common questions predominate over individual questions, and a class action is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy.

• CAFA (>\$5\,000\,000 & minimal diversity): The Class Action Fairness Act provides for federal jurisdiction over certain class actions where the aggregate amount in controversy exceeds 5,000,000, and there is minimal diversity (any plaintiff is diverse from any defendant).

Discovery

• Initial, expert, pre-trial disclosures (Rule 26(a)):

• Initial disclosures: Parties must, without awaiting a discovery request, provide certain information (e.g., names of individuals likely to have discoverable information, copies of documents supporting claims/defenses, computation of damages, insurance agreements).

• Expert disclosures: Identification of expert witnesses, their reports, and relevant compensation.

• Pre-trial disclosures: Identification of witnesses to be called at trial, documents/exhibits to be used.

• Scope: Non-privileged, relevant, proportional. Discovery can seek any non-privileged matter that is relevant to any party's claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case, considering burdens, costs, and importance.

• Devices:

• Depositions: Oral testimony given under oath by a deponent, useful for obtaining direct testimony from parties or non-parties. Generally limited to 10 depositions per side, 7-hour limit per deposition.

• Interrogatories: Written questions directed to a party, which must be answered in writing under oath. Limited to 25 interrogatories per party.

• Requests to produce: Requests for documents, electronically stored information (ESI), or tangible things, or to permit entry onto land for inspection.

• Physical/mental exams: Available only upon court order for good cause shown when a party's physical or mental condition is in controversy.

• RFAs (Requests for Admission): Written requests to admit the truth of certain matters relating to facts, application of law to fact, or authenticity of documents, which, if not denied, are deemed admitted.

• Duty to preserve ESI; spoliation sanctions Rule 37(e): Parties have a duty to take reasonable steps to preserve electronically stored information when litigation is reasonably anticipated. If ESI is lost due to spoliation (failure to preserve), courts may impose sanctions under Rule 37(e), ranging from adverse inference instructions to dismissal or default judgment, depending on the culpability.

• Motions to compel & sanctions (fees, issue preclusion, dismissal, default): If a party fails to provide discovery, the requesting party may move to compel. If granted, sanctions may follow, including payment of attorney's fees, an order precluding certain issues from being argued, dismissal of the action, or entry of a default judgment.

Pretrial & Disposition Without Trial

• Rule 16 scheduling order after 26(f) conference; sanctions for non-compliance: The court must issue a scheduling order after the parties have conferred as required by Rule 26(f) on a discovery plan. The order sets deadlines for motions, discovery, and trial. Failure to comply can result in sanctions.

• Voluntary dismissal Rule 41(a); two-dismissal rule:

• A plaintiff can voluntarily dismiss an action without a court order before the defendant serves an answer or motion for summary judgment.

• The "two-dismissal rule" states that if a plaintiff previously dismissed the same claim in any court, a second voluntary dismissal acts as an adjudication on the merits (with prejudice).

• Summary judgment Rule 56: Provides for judgment without a full trial if there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the non-movant.

Trial

• Jury demand within 14 days of last pleading: A party may demand a jury trial on any issue triable of right by a jury by serving a written demand no later than 14 days after the last pleading directed to the issue is served. A federal jury must have at least 6 jurors and no more than 12, and their verdict must be unanimous unless the parties stipulate otherwise.

• JMOL (directed verdict) Rule 50(a) after full evidence; renew as JNOV within 28 days:

• Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL) is a motion made by a party during trial, after the opposing party has been fully heard, arguing that no reasonable jury could find for the non-moving party based on the evidence presented.

• Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (JNOV – Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict) can be filed by a party who previously made a JMOL motion, within 28 days after the entry of judgment, if the jury reached a verdict against them.

• New trial Rule 59 within 28 days for error, prejudice, verdict against weight, excessive damages (remittitur):

• A court may grant a new trial on all or some issues within 28 days after the entry of judgment for reasons such as a procedural error during trial that prejudiced a party, a verdict that is clearly against the great weight of the evidence, or excessive damages.

• Remittitur: If damages are excessive, the court may offer the plaintiff a choice between accepting a reduced award or undergoing a new trial on damages.

Post-Judgment

• Motion to alter/amend Rule 59(e) – 28 days: A party may file a motion to alter or amend a judgment within 28 days after its entry, typically used to correct errors of law or fact, or to present newly discovered evidence.

• Relief from judgment Rule 60: Allows a court to relieve a party from a final judgment, order, or proceeding.

• Clerical mistakes: Can be corrected at any time.

• 60(b)(1-3) within one year (mistake, inadvertence, surprise, excusable neglect; newly discovered evidence; fraud/misconduct by an opposing party).

• Others "reasonable time" (void judgment; judgment satisfied/released; any other reason justifying relief).

• Appeal: File notice within 30 days (60 days if U.S. party or officer/agency is a party); generally, only final orders are appealable unless there are exceptions:

• §1292 interlocutory appeals: Permits appeals of certain non-final orders, such as injunctions or orders concerning receiverships, and allows for certified interlocutory appeals for controlling questions of law.

• Collateral order doctrine: Allows immediate appeal of a small class of pre-judgment orders that conclusively determine an important issue separate from the merits, which would effectively be unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment.

• Rule 54(b) certification: Allows a district court to certify for immediate appeal a judgment on one or more but fewer than all claims or parties if there is no just reason for delay.

Preclusion

• Claim preclusion (res judicata): Prevents parties from relitigating claims that have already been decided or that could have been decided in a prior action.

• Same parties (or those in privity with them).

• Same claim (transactional test: claims arise from the same transaction or series of transactions).

• Final valid judgment on the merits from the first action.

• Issue preclusion (collateral estoppel): Prevents relitigation of specific issues that were actually litigated and decided in a prior case.

• Same issue as in the prior action.

• The issue was actually litigated and decided in the prior action.

• The determination of the issue was essential to the judgment in the prior action.

• Can be asserted non-mutually (by someone who was not a party to the prior suit) against a party who had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue in the prior action.

• Full Faith & Credit: Under Article IV of the Constitution and 28\,U.S.C.\,§1738, states must give full faith and credit to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. This generally means that a judgment rendered in one state (or federal court) must be given the same preclusive effect (claim and issue preclusion) in another state (or federal court) as it would receive in the rendering jurisdiction.

Federal Civil Procedure Deadlines