Civil Procedure - Freer Fall 00 01

8/14/2019 Civil Procedure - Freer Fall 00 01

1/27

Professor FreerFall 2000

Civil Procedure Outline

PART I: PERSONAL JURISDICTION: In what state can plaintiff suethe defendant (geographic location)?

I. 3 Type o! Juridiction

A. In Peron"# Juridiction: Courts power over defendant personall. $. In Re# Juridiction: Courts power over propert.

C. %u"i In Re# Juridiction: Courts power over propert.D. %u"i In Re#& Juridiction: Courts power over propert.

' type o! Peron"l Juridiction St"te( Po)er E!!ect Juridiction"l

Predic"te

Notice

In persona! Person Personalo"ligationoveranthingowned

Consents to#urisdiction$presence inthe state$ or aresident of thestate

%ervice ofprocess in thatforu! statewhere ou are"eing sued&include cop ofco!plaint 'su!!ons

In re! Propert %eiure ofpropert at theoutset of

litigation

%eiure ofpropert atoutset plus

pu"licationuasi in re! Propert *eter!ines

who ownspropert"etweenindividualparties

%eiure ofpropert at theoutset oflitigation

%eiure ofpropert atoutset pluspu"lication

uasi in re!+ Propert Andisputecould "eI,+ case.

-udg!entli!ited tovalue overspropert inthat state.

%eiure ofpropert at theoutset oflitigation

%eiure ofpropert atoutset pluspu"lication

/


2/27

A. In Peron"#

*. +ener"l: !oru# ," -uridiction over de!end"nt !or cl"i# t,"t

"roe "ny),ere in t,e )orld.

. Speci!ic: !oru# only ," -uridiction over de!end"nt !or cl"i#

t,"t "roe in t,e !oru#.

i. Penoyer v. Ne!!/U.S. *0112:Suit *: itc,ell v. Ne!! /*0452:itchell sued 1eff in an regon %tate Court$alleging that 1eff owed hi! a"out 3240.00 in attorne fees. 1eff was notpersonall served5 rather service was " pu"lication in local newspaper. 1eff didnot appear and default #udge!ent was issued. A !onth later$ 1eff ac6uired so!eland in regon that was deeded to hi! fro! the 7nited %tates govt. itchell hadsheriff seie and sell the land to satisf the #udge!ent. itchell "ought the landat a sheriffs auction$ got a sheriffs deed and later sold the land to Pennoer.Suit : Pennoyer v. Ne!! /*0112:

1eff sued Pennoer in federal court$ arguing that the sale was invalid "ecause theregon court lac8ed #urisdiction over hi! (Collateral Attac8). 9he %upre!e

Court agreed and held that regon lac8ed #urisdiction in itchells suit "ecausethere was no personal service of process on 1eff in regon.

9erritorialit

%tate sovereignt

In Persona!/"2 "in Point:

Preence: served with process in state & general #urisdiction

A6ent: service of process on agent is #ust as good as service ondefendant

Do#icile:if defendant is do!iciled in a foru! state$ the foru! hasgeneral #urisdiction over that person$ regardless of whether he is

phsicall served. :ou can "e sued if our per!anent ho!e is locatedin that state even if ou are in our te!porar ho!e$ "ecause ou havea per!anence or connection to that state.illi7en v. yer /U.S.*8'92

Conent: ;


3/27

iii. ;",in6ton v. Intern"tion"l S,oe Co#p"ny/U.S. *8'52:9he court upheld in persona! #urisdiction over a nonresident defendant "ased onsste!atic and continuous contacts with the state. In International %hoe$ thedefendant was a *elaware Corporation head6uartered in %t. ois. It e!ploed /@

salespeople in ashington who solicited orders and the were paid "co!!ission. Although it had no per!anent office in ashington$ the sales theregenerated co!!issions of at least 3@/$000a ear. ashington sent registered!ail to notif corporate office in %t. ois. 9he state clai!ed that International%hoe was o"ligated to contri"ute to the states une!plo!ent co!pensation fundin a!ounts proportionate to the activities of its salespeople. 9he Court upheldashingtons #urisdiction$ "ased on the volu!e and sste!atic contacts withinthe state$ as well as the a!ount the clai! was directl related to the level ofactivities in the state.

t"te ," -uridiction over de!end"nt i!: rel"tedne> "nd t"te( interet in

providin6 " !oru# i "ll relev"nt in "ertin6 -uridiction.

v. "non v. Den7l" /U.S. *8502:

*ora *onner created a trust while she was do!iciled in Pennslvania. 9he trustinstru!ent was e


4/27

death$ dispute developed "etween fa!il !e!"ers who inherited trust and trust"eneficiaries. *onners will was pro"ated in Florida$ and under Florida aw$ the*el. "an8 was a necessar part to litigation. *id Florida have #urisdiction over*el. "an8?"in point:

De!end"nt( cont"ct )it, t,e !oru# #ut involve:Purpoe!ul "v"il#ent: defendant !ust reach out to the foru! in so!ewa. Unil"ter"l "ctof a third part is not enough.

vi. ;orldB;ide ol7)"6en Corp v. ;oodon /U.S. *8092:9he ,o"insons "ought a new Audi fro! %eawa$ a dealership in 1ew :or8.9hen the left 1ew :or8 for a new ho!e in Ariona$ "ut en route were involvedin a fier crash in 8laho!a. Alleging that the in#uries sustained were aggravated" AudiDs negligent place!ent of the gas tan8 and other fuel sste! designdefects$ the ,o"insons "rought an action in federal court in 8laho!a against%eawa and orld&ide."in Point:

oree"=ilitythat product will get to state is not enough5 forseea"ilit thatdefendant will "e ,"led into courtis relevant (forseea"ilit defendant will"e sued in the foru!).

No Peron"l Juridiction =ec"ue:

No purpoe!ul "v"il#ent

No !oree"=ility> Court held it was not foreseea"le "ecause car got to8laho!a through the unil"ter"l "ctof (plaintiffs "ringing the car there)a third part.

vii. $ur6er in6 v. RudFe)ic7F /U.S. *8052:

,udewic$ a ichigan resident$ contended the Florida Court lac8ed personal#urisdiction over hi! even though he had long conducted "usiness in Florida and

his franchise contract held that it was to "e governed " Florida law. All periodicpa!ents for licensing and franchising were sent to Florida. ,udewic defaultedon the o"ligations$ and Burger Eing "rought a diversit suit against ,udewic."in point:

ut Loo7 At ini#u# Cont"ct An"lyi:

Purpoe!ul Av"il#ent: #ut ,"ve " relev"nt cont"ct or no

-uridiction. $"l"ncin6 Sc"le: %tronger showing of fairness cansu"stitute for a lower level of contact.G *efendant deli"eratel reachedout "eond ichigan and negotiated with a Florida Corporation for along&ter! franchise and the !anifold "enefits that would derive fro!affiliation with a nationwide organiation.

"irne "nd Re"on"=lene:o De!end"nt( =urden: is inconvenient for defendant to co!e to

Florida$ "ut not unconstitutional.

Due Procedoes not sa foru! has to "e the "est place.

*efendant !ust show that it is o 6r"vely di!!icult "ndinconvenient that the defendant is at a severe disadvantagein the litigation.

Si#ple econo#ic dip"rity is not enough

H


5/27

oreee"=ility: ,udewic refusal to !a8e the contractuall re6uiredpa!ents in ia!i$ and his continued use of Burger Eings trade!ar8s$caused foreseea"le in#ur to the corporation in Florida. 9herefore$ it ispresu!ed reasona"le for ,udewic8 to "e called into court in Florida toaccount for his in#uries.

viii. A",i et"l Indutry Co.> LTD v. Superior Court o! C"li!orni"> Sol"noCounty /US *8012:

Asahi$ a -apanese Corporation appealed fro! a decision of the California%upre!e Court discharging a pere!ptor writ issued " the appeals court6uashing service of su!!ons in Cheng %hins inde!nit action$ contending thatthere did not e


6/27

J. $renn"n "nd 3 ot,er Jutice:

o Presence alone is not enough

o ust "e analed in ini!u! Contacts Analsis=

Purposeful Avail!ent

Fairness and ,easona"leness

?. elicoptero N"cion"le v. "ll /U.S. *80'2:Plaintiffs are the relatives of the H A!ericans that died in a helicopter crash.*efendants are ConsortioK%J$ Bell Jelicopter$ and Jelicol. Plaintiffs are suingfor wrongful death.

+ener"l Juridiction: defendants did not have enough su"stantialsste!atic continuous contact with foru!.

$. In Re# H %u"i In Re#: states #urisdictional "asis is over defendantspropert (real or personal) in the state.#"ny lon6"r# do not #eet de!"#"tion> o in re# "nd u"i in re# i

ued.

i. S,"!!er v. eitner /U.S. *8112:%haffer (one of the 2L defendants in first suit) is appealing case against Jeitner.Jeitner is filing a shareholders derivative suit against Mrehound su"sidiaries$officers and directors "ecause he clai!s the have "een negligent in their duties.Mrehounds principal place of "usiness is in Phoeni


7/27


8/27

o A"ode service or su"stituted service

*efendant pas the cost of such service

4. Ot,er et,od o! Proce in eder"l Court: '/e2/*2

Pursuant to the law of the state in which the district court is located

7se an !ethods allowed " the court of the state in which defendantis served

1. ;,ere c"n proce =e ervedG

%ervice is good throughout the state where district court is located0. et,od o! Proce Upon Corp. "nd Aoc.: " delivering a cop of

su!!ons and co!plaint to

An officer$ or

A !anaging or general agent$ or

9o an other agent authoried " appoint!ent$ or

B an agent authoried " law to receive service of process.8. C"n eder"l Court ervice proce outide t"te line: '/72/*2/"2

nl if state law authories it

'/72/*2/$2 does not appl to serving process on an original defendant(nl applies to necessar parties or i!peding parties onl).

*9. I##unity To Service o! Proce:

;ven though a defendant is present in a state as a part$ witness$ or asa lawer in another case (different lawsuit)$ we are i!!une for!service of process. *efendant can onl go into state$ do "usiness andleave.

Force and Fraud= If defendant in state when served "ecause he wastric8ed$ forced$ or frauded into the state$ he is i!!une fro! service ofprocess.

%a""ath= so!e states recognie i!!unit fro! service or process onthe %a""ath da.

$. Contitution"l St"nd"rd or Notice

*. ull"ne v. Centr"l "nover $"n7 Trut Co. /*8592:

1ew :or8 %tatute provides pooling of s!all trusts estates into one fund forinvest!ent ad!inistration. Court entered #udg!ent saing all "eneficiaries areestopped fro! co!plaining against trustee and the court will set thead!inistration fee owed to trustee. 7nder statute in 1ew :or8$ all was re6uiredwas pu"lication notice."in Point:

ust use a for! of notice of service of process that is reasona"lcalculated under all circu!stances to apprise the defendant of the suit.

,easona"le ti!e in which to respond (,ule H(!) within /20 das afterfiling of co!plaint)

1otice " pu"lication !a "e o8a (for e


9/27

o Plaintiff will "e re6uired to give an affidavit saing he cant find

defendant.

P"rt III. SU$JECT ATTER JURISDICTION: In ),"t Court int,"t t"te "re )e 6oin6 to proceed> !eder"l court or t"te courtG A. St"te Court: can hear an cognia"le clai! in the world$ e


10/27

u#"n $ein6 ,"ve only one do#icile> ),ic,

#e"n " peron c"n =e " citiFen o! only one t"te

!or diverity purpoe.

:ou are ascri"ed a do!icile when ou are "orn$usuall the do!icile of parent$ which is our

citienship for diversit purposes. herever that is (usuall do!icile of parent)$ a

person 8eeps that citienship until theaffir!ativel change it " !eeting test for*o!icile.

*33/"2/2.Alien"6e Reuire#ent:

ust "e "etween a citien of a state and an alien

A!ount in controvers !ust e =ut

c"n 6o to t"te court:

o T,ey "re not conidered citiFen !or diverity purpoe:

ust "e A!erican

ust "e do!iciled= (/) phsical and (2) intento T,ey "re not conidered !orei6ner !or "lien"6e

-uridiction:

9he are A!erican Citiens

*33/d2: 9reat these places as states for *iversit Citienshippurposes=

A!erican possessions such as *C$ Puerto ,ico$ 7.%. SirginIslands$ and Mua!

*33/c2/*2: CitiFen,ip o! Corpor"tion: A corporation is a citienof=

"ll t"te ),ere it i incorpor"ted (it is possi"le to "eincorporated in !ore than one state$ "ut hardl ever happens)5and

t,e one t"te ),ere " corpor"tion ," it princip"l pl"ce o!

=uine (there is onl one principal place of "usiness). Doe not c"re ,o) #"ny pl"ce t,e corp. doe

=uine or ," #"nu!"cturin6 pl"nt> t,ere

i only one princip"l pl"ce o! =uine.

Co#plete Diverity Rule "pplie to corpor"tion "lo.

Tet To Deter#ine " Corpor"tion( Princip"l Pl"ce o! $uine

Nerve center tet:focuses on where corporate decisions are!ade$ usuall the head6uarters.

/0


11/27

ucle center tet:focuses on where corporations "ul8 ofactivities ta8e place.

ost courts loo8 at all the factors.

ost courts will use the nerve center tetunless all of theactivit is in one state.

If all activit is in one state$ courts use #ucle center tet.even though there are two tests$ there is onl one principal

place of "usiness.

Supre#e Court t"ted !or Unincorpor"ted Aoci"tion:

ou loo8 at citienship of all the !e!"ers. An unincorporatedassociation li8e a partnership$ is a citien of ever state inwhich its !e!"ers are citiens.

/@@2(c)(/) does not appl to unincorporated associations=

a"or 7nions

aw Fir!s (loo8 at li!ited an general partners)

I! unincorpor"ted "oci"tion 6o to !eder"l ct.> it

)ill #ot li7ely =e " !eder"l uetion c"e.

Repreent"tive Suit *33/c2/*2: cases involving !inors$inco!petents or decedents estates$ ou loo8 to the citienship of therepresented$ not the representative.

*358: 7sed to ta8e care of these collusive atte!pts to creatediversit. Court will loo8 to citienship of assignee when ouassign right to sue to so!eone else. (nl concerned withcollusive atte!pts. One liti6"nt c"n c,"n6e do#icile !or olepurpoe o! cre"tin6 diverity).

A#ount In Controvery Reuire#ent o! M15>999.9* ut $e et:

*33/"2/*2: ,e6uires a good faith allegation that clai!e


12/27

o Cannot get punitive da!ages as a !atter of law$ so if punitive

da!ages included in a clai! of 3Q4$000.0/$ case will "edis!issed.

A66re6"tion Principle: Aggregation is where the plaintiff !ust addtogether 2 or !ore clai!s to get over 3Q4$000.

;,en i A66re6"tion Per#ii=le:Do not "ddre iue i! de"lin6)it, one cl"i#

o nl allowed if there is one pl"inti!! v. one de!end"nt.

o I! #ultiple p"rtie "re on eit,er ide$ aggregation is not

allowedo 1ot saing we need 3Q4$000.0/ fro! each defendant$ we need

overall a!ount in controvers that e


13/27

contract. In co!plaint the stated= (/) the federal statute does not appl.(2) if so$ it is constitutional.

o 1o diversit of citienship ("oth parties are fro! Eentuc8)

o 1o Federal uestion "ecause clai! does not arise under

federal law.

o 9he !entioned federal law$ "ut "reach of contract is notgoverned " federal law.

or St"tute o! Apply> A7 Kourel!:

o Is the plaintiff suing to enforce a right under that federal law?

o If clai! has nothing to do with Federal %tatute$ there is no

federal 6uestion.E?cluive eder"l Court Juridiction: patent infringe!ent

(not case involving a patent)$ antitrust cases$ copright cases$federal tort clai!s act cases$ etc.

C. Re#ov"l: (have their own venue provisions R /HH/) we givedefendant a choice to go to federal court. nl allows defendants to

have a case filed in state court re!oved to federal court. c"n only re#ove !ro# t"te to !eder"l> not !ro# !ed. to t"te.

*''*: C"n only re#ove " c"e to !eder"l ditrict court t,"t

e#=r"ce t,e t"te court ),ere it )" ori6in"lly !iled.

e?ception: all defendants !ust agree to re!oval

*''*/c2: allows re!oval of an entire case " a defendant if there is aseparate and independent federal 6uestion clai! against her.

+ener"l Rule:case is re!ova"le if it could have "een heard in federalcourt. 9here !ust "e su"#ect !atter #urisdiction (*iversit ofcitienship or federal 6uestion).

E?ception to +ener"l Rule or Diverity C"e:

o 1o re!oval if an defendant is a citien of foru! R /HH/(")

o 1o re!oval !ore than / ear after case was filed in state court

R /HHO(")

*''4 Procedure !or Re#ov"l: 39 D"y

(a) dont as8 per!ission$ #ust re!ove& file a notice of re!oval inthe district court

short plain state!ent of grounds of re!oval

cop of all papers served on defendant(") file within @0 das after defendant gets cop of initial pleading$

or within @0 das after defendant gets su!!ons if pleading has

"een filed in court and is not re6uired to served on defendant(whichever period is shorter).

*''1 I! I#properly Re#oved:

o plaintiff !ust raise pro"le! in @0 das (applies to procedural

pro"le!s)o ac8 of su"#ect !atter #urisdiction can "e re!anded at an ti!e

P"rt I. enue: In ),ic, eder"l Ditrict Court Do ;e L"y enueG Rule:

/@


14/27

o 1o constitutional right to proper venue

o enue doe not "pply to re#ov"l c"e

o *o not appl to local actions (cases involving land)= ou la

venue in district where land lieso Senue applies to 9ransitor actions

A. $"ic enue Rule:o *38*/"2: Diverity C"e

o *38*/=2: eder"l %uetion C"e

In Any C"e ;e "ve T)o C,oice: *38*/"2 H *38*/=2

i. plaintiff can la venue in an district where alldefendants resides. If all defendants reside in differentdistricts of the sa!e state$ can la venue in districtwhere either of the! resides

ii. plaintiff can la venue in an district where asu"stantial part of clai! arose

"y =e #ore t,"n one u=t"nti"l p"rt o! ),ere

cl"i# "roe> you need to "r6ue =ot,. *38*/"2/32: Diverity C"e:plaintiff can la venue where

an defendant is su"#ect to personal #urisdiction. hencase is filed$ if there is no district in which case !a "e"rought.

*38*/=2/32: eder"l %uetion:In an district where andefendant is found$ if there is no district where case !a "e"rought.R/@/(a)(@) and R/@/(")(@)= onl where clai!s arise

overseas. Can onl use these where there is no districtin countr availa"le.

residence usuall refers to where defendant isdo!iciled$ "ut !a reside in a separate place fro!do!icile.

/@/(c)= a corporation resides in all districts where thecorporation is su"#ect to personal #urisdiction where the(co!plaint is filed) case is co!!enced.

$. Tr"n!er o! enue Rule

o ou can onl transfer intrasste!

o ou can transfer "etween federal district courts

o state courts can transfer within courts in their state$ "ut

cannot transfer fro! state to state.i. o!!#"n v. $l"7i /US *8492: we can onl transfer to a federal

district court that has personal #urisdiction over defendant and isa proper venue. ust "e true personal #urisdiction$ independentof waiver.

Di!!erent enue Tr"n!er St"tute:

o *'9'/"2: onl availa"le if the original court was a

proper venue. a transfer "ased on=

/H


15/27

convenience of the parties

convenience of the witnesses

the interest of #ustice

ii. "n Dunen /US *84'2: choice of law rules go with the case.iii. eren /US *8892: choice of law rules appl even if plaintiff

initiates the transfer.o *'94/"2:applies onl if original court was i!proper

venue. Can transfer fro! a court has i!proper venue.

Can transfer in interest of #ustice$ or

*is!iss

C. oru# Non Convenien= (co!es up when we cannot transfer"ecause "est foru! !ight "e in another #urisdiction) *octrine" which a court dis!isses a case "ecause the "alance ofinconvenience tips ver strongl toward another court. 1eed astronger showing for dis!issal.

i. Piper Aircr"!t Co. v. Reyno /US *80*2: A s!all co!!ercialaircraft crashed into area in %cottish during a charter flight fro!Blac8pool to Perth. 9he pilot and five passengers were 8illedinstantl. 9he decedents were all %cottish su"#ects and residents$as their heirs and ne


16/27


17/27

eder"l Rule */=2: Lit o! 1 de!ene t,"t t,e de!end"nt

c"n r"ie eit,er =y "n)er or =y #otion to di#i:

/*2 l"c7 o! u=-ect #"tter -uridiction>

/2 l"c7 o! peron"l -uridiction>

/32 i#proper venue>

/'2 inu!!iciency o! proce (!essed up su!!ons orco!plaint)

/52 inu!!iciency o! ervice o! proce (didnt pla " therules)

/42 !"ilure to t"te " cl"i#

/12 !"ilure to -oin "n indipen"=le p"rty

Rule */=2/*2:can "e raised at an ti!e according to */,2/32which states that the court shall dis!iss actions where there islac8 of su"#ect !atter #urisdiction.

Rule */62 */,2: waiva"le defenses/2(")(2)&(")(4) !ust "eincluded in our first ,ule /2 response.

Rule */=2/42 */=2/12:can "e raised anti!e through theend of case$ "ut not after #udg!ent.

P"rt I. Ple"din6= docu!ents that the parties file with the court setting forthclai!s and defenses.

7nder Federal ,ules=o pleadings are "asicall used to give notice.

o li!ited nu!"er of pleadings (co!plaint and answer)

Rule 1/"2:

o Plaintiff files aco#pl"int

o *efendant !a file an "n)er

o Plaintiff !a replyto defendants answer (ver rare

onl done when the court orders plaintiff to)!an states adopt federal rules on pleading

Code Ple"din6: shares the "asic goals of federal rule pleading"ut re6uires !ore detail in the pleadings$ !ore technicalit.

o Code specifies pleading facts to constitute a cause of

action.

n the Federal %ide$ we want to decide cases on their !erits$not on technicalit$ reflected in ,ule L(a)(2).

o Rule 0/"2/2: plaintiff is e


18/27

A. Co#pl"int

$. T,e An)er "nd Ot,er De!enive Repone

C. A#end#ent

D. Rule **

A. Co#pl"int: pleading " the plaintiff that gets "allga!e rolling. Rule 0/"2co!plaint !ust have three things=

*2 t"te#ent o! u=-ect #"tter -uridiction

2 t"te#ent o! " cl"i# (short and plain state!ent ofclai!)

32 " de#"nd !or -ud6#ent

"ny o! t,e 3 i #iin6> c"e #ut =e di#ied.

Federal ,ules *o 1ot ,e6uire a great a!ount of detail instate!ent of clai!$ we can "e fairl conclusor.

Rule 8 Speci"l "tter t,"t ut =e Ple"d in Det"il:

o 8/=2: circu#t"nce contitutin6 !r"ud or

#it"7e> #ut =e ple"d )it, p"rticul"rity/ele#ent t,"t contitute !r"ud or #it"7e2

o 8/62: ite# o! peci"l d"#"6e: "re t,oe t,"t do

not !lo) n"tur"lly !ro# "n event. ut =e

ple"ded )it, peci!icity /,"ve to 6ive c,"pter

"nd vere2

i. C"e In AriFon"

Plaintiff was hit " car and he suffered all the da!ages wewould e


19/27

,ule (c)= Burden is on defendant also to raise conditionsprecedent have not all "een !et.

Rule '*.olunt"ry Di#i"l: su"#ect to the provisions of,ule 2@(e)$ of ,ule OO$ and of an statute of the 7%$ anaction !a "e dis!issed " the plaintiff without order of

the court.o 3 Option or Di#i"l:

B Filing a notice of dis!issal at an ti!e"efore service " the adverse part of ananswer or of a !otion for su!!ar#udg!ent (unless otherwise specified in theorder$ a dis!issal is without pre#udice).

B filing a stipulation of dis!issal signed "all parties who have appeared in the action(unless otherwise specified in the order$ adis!issal is without pre#udice).

Notice o! di#i"l oper"te " "n"d-udic"tion upon t,e #erit /dismissal

with prejudice2 ),en !iled =yplaintiff who

has once dismissedin "ny US or t"te

court !or "ction ="ed on or includin6

"#e cl"i#.

B order of the court (unless otherwisespecified in the order$ a dis!issal is withoutpre#udice).

o 1ote=

A dis!issal without pre#udiceG !eans that

plaintiff can reinstate the case. Courts li!ita!ount of dis!issals without pre#udice toli!it the a!ounts of ti!e defendant isharassed.

A dis!issal with pre#udiceG or on the!eritsG "ars the plaintiff fro! "ringing theclai! again.

,ule H/ per!its plaintiff to act unilaterallin so!e situations "ut re6uires a court orderin others.

Rule '*/=2. ;"y to Involunt"ry Di#i:

o Anthing under /2(") would constitute an

involuntar dis!issalo Failure of plaintiff to prosecute

o Failure of plaintiff to co!pl with Fed. ,ules

o Failure to co!pl with an order of the court

/


20/27

%C= !eans Federal court will order theplaintiff to show cause. Je !ust provecase is "eing wor8ed on.

,ule 1isi= sa!e as %C in Fed. Courts$"ut is used in state courts.

$. De!end"nt( Repone: can either file "n)er /ple"din62or "ring a#otion.

,ule /2(a) ust do within 9 d"yafter service of process$ oro ,ule /2(")= If service of su!!ons has "een ti!el

waived on re6uest under ,ule H(d)$ within 49 d"yafterthe re6uest of waiver was sent (or within 0 das afterthat date if the defendant was addressed outside an#udicial district of the 7.%.).

De!end"nt i not reuired to erve "n "n)er

to t,e co#pl"int until 49 d"y "!ter t,e d"te>

(or 0das after that date if the defendant was

addressed outside an #udicial district of the7.%.).

Rule '/d2/32 Doe not "pply to #otion> o

#ut till !ile )it,in 9 d"y "!ter ervice o!

proce /su!!ons ' co!plaint).

,ule /2(") lists so!e !otionso otions are defensive responses.

,ule /2(e) !otion for !ore definite state!ent (where apleading is so vague and a!"iguous that ou cant respond toit)

,ule /2(f) !otion to stri8e (scandalous !atters$ or not anele!ent under su"stantive law$ etc.)

Punitive da!ages= usuall involve cases of 9ort lawconcerning fraud$ oppression$ or !alice.

a want to stri8e with /2(f) !otion for words li8ethose to avoid punitive da!ages.

,ule /2(e) and /2(f) !ust "e filed "efore we file responsivepleading (answer).

,e!e!"er /2(")s can "e put in the answer or !otionto dis!iss and re!e!"er the waiva"le defenses /2(g) '/2(h)

%o!e cases ou "ring a !otion and answer. If ou "ring a,ule /2 !otion$ ou do not have to file an answer in the!eanti!e. If !otion is denied$ then ou have to file an answerwithin *9 d"y.

;,"t Do Kou Put In An An)erG

*2 Rule 0/=2 #ut repond to "lle6"tion in co#pl"int. Only

3 type or repone:

To "d#it

20


21/27

To deny: (failure to den is an ad!ission)K A #oinedissue is one that s have denied and needs a factualdeter!ination.

L"c7 o! Su!!icient In!o to Ad#it or Deny: (can notuse this response if answer is in our control or pu"lic

8nowledge) has the effect of a denial.do not r"ie ne) !"ct> -ut "n)er t,e

co#pl"int.

2 A!!ir#"tive De!ene /even i! I did t,i tu!!> you till do

not )in2

Aertion o! " ne) !"ct> i! you don(t ple"d in "n)er>

you ,"ve )"ived it.

Rule 0/c2 lit #"ny de!ene> o#e "re:

St"tute o! li#it"tion

St"tute o! !r"ud

Au#ption o! ri7

Re Judic"t"

Contri=utory Ne6li6ence

$urden o! Proo!: If ou have the "urden of pleading anissue$ usuall have the "urden of proving that issue.

o Pl"inti!!: !ust prove ele!ents of su"stantive law.

If ATBTCT* (ele!ents) U plaintiff wins$

7nless VT:TN (affir!ative defenses) aretrue U defendant wins

o In ,epa!ent of oan Cases=

Plaintiff !ust plead that ou failed to repa$

their was a contract$ and a!ount of ti!e torepa.

*efendant !ust den failure to repa inanswer$

o But also !ust plead in affir!ative

defense that he did pa$ "ecause hewould have cancelled chec8 so it isonl right that he has the "urden( no wa plaintiff could prove).

o In *efa!ation(oral) Cases= so!eti!es called li"el

(written) and slander$ is a false pu"lished (press$

oral$ etc.) of a person$ and it upholds plaintiff toridicule.

Plaintiff !ust plead (/) defendant pu"lishedfalse state!ent$ (2) it was false$ and (@)upholds plaintiff to ridicule.

*efendant !ust plead in affir!ativedefense that clai! is false and den in

2/


22/27

response. Burden is on plaintiff to pleadand prove his state!ent.

*enials=o Meneral denial= one sentence docu!ent that sas

defendant denies each and ever docu!ent in

co!plaint. ***be careful, usually cannot denyeverything.

o %pecific denial= respond to each paragraph

individuall=

*efendant ad!its the allegations ofparagraph one of the co!plaint. *efendantdenies allegations of paragraph two of theco!plaint$ and so forth.

o 7suall in state courts=

Argu!entative denial= if

responding$ ad!it or den. If ou

raise a new fact$ it !a "e dee!edan ad!ission.

1egative pregnant= Can result fro!

a denial that is too literal that ispregnant with an ad!ission of so!efact.

De!"ult -ud6#ent: If defendant does not respond in20 das$ he !a default. *efault is a notation ondoc8et sheet held " court saing defendant has notresponded in an appropriate ti!e.;,en p"rty ue> "l)"y "dd plu cot.

,e!e!"er R/@@2 *iv. f Cit. if #udg!ent is lessthan Q4$000$ the plaintiff !a have to pa costs.o Rule 55.De!"ult: Step Pl"inti!! ut T"7e

(!ust see cler8):

Rule 55/"2: hen a defendant fails topleador otherwise defend as provided "these rules$ plaintiff !a show "affidavit or otherwise$ the cler8 shallenter the parts default.

Rule 55/=2/*2H $y Cler7:

Cler8 shall enter #udg!ent for

that a!ount and costs against thedefendant.

Clai! has to "e a su! certain or

su! which can " co!putation"e !ade certain$

Affidavit showing a!ount is due$

22


23/27

*efendant failure to appear

(!eans we havent heardanthing fro! defendant at all)$

*efendant is not an inco!petent

or infant (!inor).

Rule 55/=2/2H $y Court (!ust see#udge):

a8e a !otion or !ove for

default #udg!ent$

1ot against inco!petent or infant

*efendant gets notice of hearing

on default #udg!ent at least @das prior

o if he has !ade an

appearance in the caseonl.

If no appearance$ defendant does

not get notice.Kou c"n "ppe"r in "ction "nd till =e

in de!"ult> i! you don(t do tu!! in " ti#ely

#"nner.

Rule 4/=2: +ive "n Enl"r6e#ent o!

Ti#e.

If defendant is late with answer or

response$ defendant can !ove forO(").

ost courts will overloo8 O(") andallow defendant to file an answerlong as default is not on the doc8et.

nce default is on doc8et$ defendant

cannot file.

Rule 5'/c2: Can never get #udg!ent for!ore than ou as8. -udg!ent " defaultshall not e


24/27

o %hall "e !ade in a reasona"le

ti!e$ not to e


25/27

conduct$ transaction$ or occurrence as the originalpleading$ we treat as if it were filed on original date

o A#end to C,"n6e t,e P"rty: sued the wrong person$

"ut now want to sue the right person. But cant untilthe statute of li!itations has ran out$ or !a"e there is

another right person plaintiff !a want to #oin. Rule*5/c2/32: (/) if a!end!ent relates "ac8 to sa!econduct$ transaction or occurrence as the originalpleading$ (2) the new part 8new a"out the case within/20 das of filing$ and (@) new person 8new that "ut fora !ista8e$ she would have "een na!ed originall.

St"tue o! Li#it"tion: gives ou a specific a!ount of ti!e to"ring a clai!. *efa!ation= usuall one ear5 9orts= usualltwo ears5 Contracts= usuall H to 4 ears.

o *iscover= statute "egins to run when ou 8now

ouve "een in#ured

o Accrual= statute "egins to run fro! the ti!e the in#uror "reach occurred.

Cl"i# Accrue ;,en In-ury or $re"c, "ppen> t,e

t"tute t"rt runnin6.

o Tollin6!eans we are going to stop the statue fro!

running. ; 't,in6 "re true:

o 9he paper is not for an i!proper purpose

o 9he legal contentions are warranted " law or at least " a

non&frivolous argu!ent that the law ought to "e changed.

24


26/27

o 9hat an factual contentions have evidentiar support or at

least or li8el to have evidentiar support after furtherinvestigation

o 9hat denials of factual contentions have evidentiar or

li8el to after further investigation.

ide" i t,"t court doe not )"nt !rivolou docu#ent. 3 C,"n6e ro# *803 to *883 Rule ** T,"t Are I#port"nt:

o Certi!ic"tion under Rule ** i " continuin6 certi!ic"tion5

it is effective ever single ti!e that this docu!ent ispresented to the court. 7nder old rule$ ou onl certified atthe outset$ now it is a continuing certification.

o otion or iol"tion o! Rule ** Are Served> =ut not

!iled. If we thin8 the other side has violated ,ule //$ wego ahead and draft !otion for sanctions under ,ule //$"utwe do not file it with the court. e serve it on the otherside. Person then has 2/ das in which to withdraw the

offending docu!ent$ and if she does withdraw$ nosanctions against her. If she does not withdraw in 2/ das$we can go ahead and file the !otion and see8 sanctions.

o S"nction "re no) dicretion"ry. /L@ said sanctions

shall "e i!posed$ here it sas sanctions !a "e i!posed.Court can i!pose sanctions against the attorne$ the fir!$or the part itself. And the whole point of the sanction isdeterrence of a repeated conduct. ,ule e


27/27

Documents

Civil Procedure - Freer Fall 00 01