I.Personal Jurisdiction A.In Personam Jurisdiction General Jurisdiction- Defendant can be sued in this forum from a claim that arose anywhere in the world Specific Jurisdiction- Defendant is being sued in the forum from a claim that arose in the forum. 1.Constitutional Analysis Pennoyer v. NeffTraditional Basis for in Personam jurisdiction Defendant is served with process in the in the f orum– General Jurisdiction Defendant’s agent was served with process in the forum – General Jurisdiction Defendant is domicile in the forum- General Defendant consents to personal jurisdiction 1) willingly 2) failing to raise an objection –General Hess v. Pawloski- while driving in through Mass. A citizen of Pen gets i n a car accident but leaves the state before served with process. Mass. Statute and every state today has a Non Resident Motorist Act - by driving a motor vehicle in the state you have appointed a state agent to receive service of process. The court ruled that there was personal specific jurisdiction. The court ruling was consistent with the traditional basis of Pennoyer v. Neff but expanded to include implied consent . International Shoe- The Defendant must Have such minimum contacts with the forum so that exercise of jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play” Flexible Can now serve defendant with process outside of the forum Seems to have 2 parts 1) contacts 2) fairness – proved correct later in burgerking Does not overrule Pennoyer– this is the test if there is not presence in the forum Mcgee- Even though there was only one contact in the forum the courts upheld general in personam jurisdiction because 1) the defendant had solicited the plaintiff in the forum 2) the state had an interest in providing a forum for its residents to litigate 3) Relatedness- plaintiffs claim arose from defendants contact with the forum Hanson v. Denckla– Woman from PA. moves to Florida and continues her relationship with Delaware bank. The court did NOT uphold jurisdiction because the Defendant had no PurposefulAvailment- to have had jurisdiction the defendant would have had to have reached out to the forum in some way. World-Wide Volkswagen v. Woodson - No jurisdiction. Even though it was fo4reseeable that the car would get to the forum, i t was not foreseeable that the defendant would get sued in the forum. If a corporations forum then there is general in personam jurisdiction in the forum.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
General Jurisdiction- Defendant can be sued in this forum from a claim that
arose anywhere in the world
Specific Jurisdiction- Defendant is being sued in the forum from a claim that
arose in the forum.1. Constitutional Analysis
Pennoyer v. Neff
Traditional Basis for in Personam jurisdiction
Defendant is served with process in the in the forum – General Jurisdiction
Defendant’s agent was served with process in the forum – General Jurisdiction
Defendant is domicile in the forum- General
Defendant consents to personal jurisdiction 1) willingly 2) failing to raise an objection –
General
Hess v. Pawloski- while driving in through Mass. A citizen of Pen gets in a car accident but
leaves the state before served with process. Mass. Statute and every state today has a Non
Resident Motorist Act- by driving a motor vehicle in the state you have appointed a state agent
to receive service of process. The court ruled that there was personal specific jurisdiction. The
court ruling was consistent with the traditional basis of Pennoyer v. Neff but expanded to
include implied consent.
International Shoe- The Defendant must Have such minimum contacts with the forum so that
exercise of jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play”
Flexible Can now serve defendant with process outside of the forum
Seems to have 2 parts 1) contacts 2) fairness – proved correct later in burgerking
Does not overrule Pennoyer – this is the test if there is not presence in the forum
Mcgee- Even though there was only one contact in the forum the courts upheld general in
personam jurisdiction because 1) the defendant had solicited the plaintiff in the forum 2) the
state had an interest in providing a forum for its residents to litigate 3) Relatedness- plaintiffs
claim arose from defendants contact with the forum
Hanson v. Denckla – Woman from PA. moves to Florida and continues her relationship with
Delaware bank. The court did NOT uphold jurisdiction because the Defendant had noPurposeful Availment- to have had jurisdiction the defendant would have had to have reached
out to the forum in some way.
World-Wide Volkswagen v. Woodson - No jurisdiction. Even though it was fo4reseeable that
the car would get to the forum, it was not foreseeable that the defendant would get sued in the
forum. If a corporations forum then there is general in personam jurisdiction in the forum.
Coulder – The coulder effect- Don’t have to be in the forum but if you reached out to the forum
then there is purposeful availment and personal jurisdiction
Burger King v. Rudzewicz - Two Part Test 1) Contact 2) Fairness
You must satisfy the contact element before looking at the fairness element. Sliding Scale- a
lesser amount of contacts can be compensated by a greater amount of fairness but must have
some element of contact
The burden is on the defendant to show that the forum is unconstitutional “so gravely difficult
and inconvenient that you are at a severe disadvantage in the litigation” The relative wealth of
the parties is irrelevant. Due process does not guarantee the best or even a good forum it only
guarantees one that is constitutional.
Asahi Metal Industry v. Superior Court – 4/4 split Stream of Commerce Case
1) Brennan- it is a relevant contact if you put the product into the stream and reasonably
anticipate that it will get to the other states2) O’Conner- need what Brennan said plus the intent to serve the other states EX:
advertising in the forum or having customer service in the forum.
Burnham- 4/4 Split Do you need mimimum contact if you have one of the traditional basis for
jurisdiction under Pennoyer?
1) Scalia- Presence in the forum while served with process is enough- Pennoyer Lives! No
need for further analysis.
2) Brennan- Still need minimum contact.
Helicopteros – “Continuous and systematic ties with the forum gives general jurisdiction”
2. Statutory Enquiry- In Personam Jurisdiction
a) Every state grants General Jurisdiction over a defendant who is served with process
in the forum
b) Every State grants General Jurisdiction over a defendant who is domicile in the
forum
c) Every state has a Non Resident Motorist Act that grants Specific Jurisdiction to non
residents involved in a motor vehicle accident while in the forum. (implied consent
and purposeful avialment)
d) Long Arm Statute- non residents for claims other than motor vehicle. There are 2
typed of Long Arm Statutes 1) CA. – state reaches to the full extent of due process (the statutory and constitution analysis will be the same) 2) Laundry List- a non-
resident can be sued in the state on a claim that arises from the defendant doing
something specific in the forum. The laundry list lays out a list of claims that give
specific jurisdiction ex: tort, contract. Every states language is different. Look at the
statute carefully. Different courts will interpret the same language differently.
Hypo- manufactures widgets in state A person in state B is injured by the faulty
widget. Is there a tort in state B? 1) yes- because the Plaintiff was injured in state B
a) Personal service- deliver the papers directly to the defendant- cab be done
anywhere in the forum state ( does not have to be at the home or office)
b) Substituted Service- has to be at the defendants dwelling house or usual abode AND
you serve someone of suitable age and discretion who resides there. (babysitter- not
good because she goes home) (butler is ok)
c) Agent Service- serve the defendants agent- can be by contract or by operation of law d) Rule 4(e)(1) – the court may also use any method for service of process that is
allowed by state law
5. Service of process on a corporation – Rule 4(H)
You must serve an officer (pres., secretary, treasurer) of managing or general agent
(varies- someone with enough responsibility to trust he will transmit the papers) of that
corporation.
6. Waiver of service – Rule 4(1) – not service of process.
Done by first class mail a form is sent to the defendant with return envelope. If she
returns it within 30 days she has waived her right to service of process but not any other
right. If she does not waive formal service the plaintiff will have to serve formally but
defendant pays the cost of the service.
7. Where can Plaintiff serve process on the defendant?
Rule 4(k)(1)(a) – Federal Court can serve process throughout the state where the courts
siets. Can also serve process out of the state ONLY IF a state court could have served
process there as well Ex: NY Fed. Court can serve process throughout the state of NY
and out of state in any state that NY state court could serve (ex: using the long arm
statute)
Exceptions:
i) 4(k)(1)(b) – Buldge Rule- can serve process from a federal court outside the
state even without a state statute IF it is within 100 miles of the court house-
does not apply to original Defendant (only to defendants joined later underRule 14 and 19)
ii) Rule 4(k)(1)(c) and (d) – federal statutes may allow for more service of process
outside the state
B. Constitutional standard for Notice
1. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank – “Notice must be reasonably calculated under all the
circumstances to apprise the defendant of the suit”
As long as you follow the federal rules it will be constitutional (one of the 3 ways) this is
true even if the defendant never receives the notice.
Jones v. flowers- If you become aware that the defendant did not recive the notice you
may be required to take additional steps.2. Notice by Publication/ constructive notice- usually done in a newspaper. This method is
frowned upon, but in cases where the identity or location of the defendant is not know
the court may allow it as a last resort.
C. Opportunity to be heard – prejudgment seizure
Factors to protect the defendant
Defendant gets a hearing o the merits at some point
Plaintiff must give an affidavit (sworn statement) of his claim
i) 13-32(a)(1) the claim must be over 75k (exactly 75k is not good enough) this is
not counting interest and costs
ii) Plaintiff’s claim governs unless it is clear to a legal certainty that she cannot
recover that much- very unlikely unless as a matte4r of law cannot recover that
much
iii) Plaintiff’s ultimate recovery is irrelevant to subject matter jurisdiction if Plaintiff claims 76k and only recovers 10k it is ok and still have federal jurisdiction but
under 13-32(b) if this happens the plaintiff may be required to pay defendants
costs (does not include attorneys fees)
iv) Aggregation- is where we add together two or more claims to get over 75K.
neither one alone gives 75k so we combine the claims to reach the required
amount.
Rule- can have aggregate claims ONLY if there is ONE plaintiff and ONE
defendant- even if the claims are unrelated. Cannot aggregate if you have
multiple parties on either side
Rule- if have JOINT CLAIMS you go with the total value of that claim
Plaintiff sues 3 joint tortfeasors for 76k – ok because they are JOINTLY liable.
B. Federal Question- A question that arises under federal Law both citizenship and the
amount in controversy does not matter.
How do you determine whether it is a claim that involves a federal question?
1) Look only at the Plaintiffs complaint- do not look at anything the defendant does
2) Plaintiffs claim must arise out of federal law- Well- Pleaded Rule – Look only at
Plaintiffs claim and see is if the Plaintiff is enforcing a federal right?
Motly case- congress passed statute- federal law that said R.R. can’t give out free
passes. Motly sued the R.R. and in their complaint said that the fed. Law does not apply
to them but not federal jurisdiction because they are not enforcing a right. Their claim
was that of a breach of contract.
C. Supplemental Jurisdiction
For every claim in fed. Court you must have subject matter jurisdiction. Each one must meet
diversity and 75k requirement of fed. Law question. If a claim does not meet one of these
criteria it can still make it in to fed court through supplemental jurisdiction. Supplemental
jurisdiction only gets ADDITIONAL claims into fed court.
1. Mine Workers v. Gibbs
Original claim gets the case into fed court by meeting fed question of diversity. The
second claim can get in without meeting one of the requirements if it “Shares a
common nucleolus of operative fact (same real world event) with the claim that invoked
jurisdiction” Always met if claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence.
2. Does 13-67 grant supplemental jurisdiction1367 (a) yes if meets Gibbs test of sharing
a common nucleolus of operative fact
Does 1367(b) take supplemental jurisdiction away?
a) Applies only in diversity cases- never in federal Question cases AND
VI. The Erie Doctrine- only in diversity of citizenship cases- Federal Court has to decide a
particular issue the question is whether the Federal Court must follow state law on the issue?
A. Black letter law- the Federal Court MUST apply State Substantive Law issue of substance
v. Procedural Law Erie v. Tompkins
Because 1) rules of decision act 1652 if no state law on point use Federal law2) Constitution 10th
amendment- preserves to the state all powers that have not
been given to the Federal Government
Eirie- Question is whether the R.R. is LIABLE- substantive law= state law
1. Hanna v. Plumer – Erie doctrine is 2 doctrines . Hanna problems are NOT erie problems.
If there is a federal rule of civil procedure on point that clashes with state law, the
federal law governs.
B. Factors for applying Erie Doctrine – if no federal rule on point, but federal court does not
want to follw state law? If substantive issue then must apply state law, but if procedural
they don’t
How do you know if it is substantive?
1. Outcome determination- Guaranty trust v. York- state statute of limitations bared the
claim the fed. Court wanted to apply fed. Doctrine that would allow the case. NO fed.
Statute on point- Not a hanna problem- the court MUST apply state law. It is substantive
law because ignoring this state law would change the outcome of the case. The
outcome should be the same I n Fed. Court and in State court as far as the rules go.
Almost any rule can be outcome determinative.
2. Balancing of interests – Byrd v. Blue Ridge Rural Cooperative- state law said issue should
be decided by the judge but the fed court wanted to let the jury decide. – No fed. Rule
on point (not a hanna case) Not outcome determinative. If state law is not clearlysubstantive the fed court applies state law unless the Fed. Court has some interest in
doing its own way. In this case they did. – procedural
3. Twin Aims of Erie Hanna v. plumer dicta
a. Avoidance of forum shopping
b. Avoidance of inequitable administration of the law
If the fed. Court ignored state law on this issue would it cause litigants to flock to
fed. Court? If yes that’s a bad thing cuz It would be unfair to instate citizens because
they can’t go to fed. Court because they have no diversity issue.
If violates Twin Aims- MUST apply State Law
Gaspereeney- NY law- set standard for court to order new trial for excessive verdict-Substantive must follow NY Law
NY law- allowed appellate court to apply the standard de novo – procedural- Can follow fed.
Law
Erie Problem- Rules for tolling( stopping) statute of limitations – follow state law
a) The other side will not object- in this case we treat the pleading as though it is amended to
show the new information- Amend the pleading after the trial to conform to the evidence
b) The other side DOES object- in this case the evidence is inadmissible but even at trial, the
party can request leave to amend. Can do this only if 1) This new evidence sub serves the
preservation of the merits 2) the other side cannot prove prejudice in maintaining their case
on the merits
Rule 15 (c) Amendment after the statute has run
1. Rule 15(c)(2) Amendment is to add a new claim after the statute has run
Hypo- file complaint on the 1st, the statute runs on the 10th, and wants to amend on the 15th
Amended pleadings will relate back if it concerns the same transaction, conduct, or
occurrence as the original pleading. Relation back means you treat it as though it was filed
with the original pleading – the reasoning behind this is the defendant is already on notice
so there is no extra burden placed on the defendant.
2. Rule 15(c)(3) Amendment is to add a defendant after the statute has run.
This is allowed if you sued the wrong person the first time around, but somehow the
right person knew about it, and can be charged with knowledge of if, and that but for
that mistake he would have been charged in the original complaint.
3. Rule 15(c)(1) can have relation back if a statute allows it
VIII. Joinder
Joinder determines the scope of the litigation- how many parties can be joined and how many claims
can be asserted in a single case. Every joinder question will have 2 parts 1)joinder rule2) federal subject
matter jurisdiction- every claim brought in federal court must have a standing in federal subject matter
jurisdiction.
First determine whether there is procedural FRCP rule that allows for the joinder of the party or claim in
this case. If there is a joinder rule then go to the Second step and look to see if the claim or party is
supported by federal subject matter jurisdiction . If there is no subject matter jurisdiction under federal
question or diversity of citizenship, look to see if there is supplemental jurisdiction(1367).
A. Claim Joinder by the Plaintiff – Rule 18(a)- Plaintiff can assert any and and all claims against the
Defendant- do not have to be transactionaly related – applies to all claimants(cross claim) – this
is a procedural rule; once this rule is met make sure to look if there is subject matter jurisdiction.
B. Claim joinder by the Defendant
1. Counter claim- claim against an opposing party {do not confuse with cross claim} this is donewhen the defendant goes on the offensive and sues the Plaintiff rather than previously
discussed defensive measures such as affirmative defenses and denials.
against TPD from NY. There is subject matter over the impleader claim by the defendant on the TPD,
because the amount in controversy is over $75,000 and there is diversity of citizenship between
Defendant and the TPD –even if there was no diversity of citizenship there would be supplemental
jurisdiction because it arose out of the same transaction or occurrence and it is a claim brought by a
defendant so 1367(b) would not have removed it. TPD’s(NY) claim against the Plaintiff(NY) would not
have diversity jurisdiction but will have supplemental jurisdiction because 1367(a) grants jurisdiction
over claim arising out of same transaction and occurrence and since TPD is brought in because of his
relation to the occurrence and 1367(b) does not kill supplemental jurisdiction because TPD is not a
plaintiff. The claim by the plaintiff(ny) against the TPD(TPD) does not have diversity of citizenship
because both are from NY or supplemental jurisdiction because 1367(b) removes jurisdiction of
Plaintiff in diversity cases enjoined under rule 14 and this is a case brought by plaintiff against TPD
joined by rule 14. If the original claim was a federal question then the claim brought by plaintiff
against TPD will be fine because 1367(b) only removes jurisdiction in diversity cases and not in cases
involving federal question.
F. Intervention- when an absentee wishes to join herself as either a plaintiff or defendant- the
court can decide to place her as plaintiff or defendant but originally it is the absentee’s choice as
to what side she joins .
There are two types of intervention but in each the application to intervene must be timely(no
exact day specified):
1) Rule 24(a)(2) – Intervention of Right – this is satisfied if you can show that the absentee’s
interest may be harmed if she is not joined and her interest is not adequately represented
now.(similar to test for necessary party but there it’s the defendant who wanted to join the
absentee and here the absentee wants to join themselves)2) Rule 24(b) (2) – Permissive Intervention- Absentee’s claim or defense has at least one question
in common with the pending case. Whether the absentee can join is in the courts discretion.
After you determine whether the absentee can intervene under a procedural rule you MUST
determine whether that claim invokes subject matter jurisdiction.
With intervention of right the court will grant supplemental jurisdiction under 1367(a) but most
likely will not when it comes to Permissive intervention. 1367(b) will only take supplemental
jurisdiction away in diversity case when the absentee intervenes as a plaintiff or defendant and
the plaintiffs claim cannot be granted jurisdiction.
G. Interpleader- involves a dispute over property with multiple possible claimants.
1. Somebody holding property (the stakeholder) can force all potential claimants into a single
case.
2. Two types of interpleader:
1) Rule interpleader Rule 22 – a Diversity of citizenship case – stakeholder must be diverse
from every claimant. Amount in controversy must exceed $75,000. Use regular venue
rules. Regular rules of service of process.( have to use if all claimants are from the same
state)
2) Statutory interpleader – you need one claimant diverse from on other claimant. You do
not need complete diversity. 1335, 1397, 2361. Amount in controversy must exceed
$500. Lay venue where any claimant resides. Get nationwide service of process- never
have personal jurisdiction ever as long as claimant is from US. (Don’t need minimal
contacts).
H. Class Action- when a representative sues on behalf of a group it is governed by Rule 23 (can
have a plaintiff or defendant class but usually it’s a plaintiff class)
1. Initial Requirements – must meet all 4 requirements
a. Rule 23(a)(1)- Too numerous for practicable joinder (no specified amount){group is too
geographically dispersed, might destroy diversity, too many that it would be
cumbersome
b. Rule 23(a)(2)- commonality- must have questions of fact or law that are common to
the group.
c. Rule 23(a)(3)Representative’s claims must be those typical of the class- want a
representative that feels the pain of the group because we want them to be an
affective representative
d. Rule 23(a)(4)representative will fairly and adequately represent the class- looks at the
client and lawyer.
The entire class will be bound by the decision but they are not parties to the suit. There is
only an issue of due process if the representative does not do an adequate job.
2. Must fit the case within one of three kinds of class actions Rule 23- only have to meet one:
1)
Rule 23(b)(1) –Prejudice Class Action- where class treatment is necessary to avoid harmto the class members or to the party opposing the class- concerned that if have separate
litigation there will be incompatible standards of conduct for the defendant(inconsistent
rulings- EG: shareholders suing for dividend disbursements- different shareholders may
be awarded different amounts or not win at all -Usually when there is limited funds
available gives everyone a chance to be awarded something.
2) Rule 23(b)(2)- Party opposing the class acted on grounds that are generally applicable to
the class, and that makes an injunction or declaratory judgment appropriate. - where
plaintiff is after an injunction.
3) Rule 23(b)(3)-Damages Class-
2 requirements that must be met:a) Must show that common questions predominate.- already know that you need
commonality but here the commonality has to be the most important part of the
suit.
b) The class action is the superior method for resolving this dispute.
Rule 37(d) i) striking the pleadings II) disallowing evidence – examples of sanctions
x. Pre-Trial Adjudication- getting rid of a case before it makes it to trial
A. Voluntary Dismissal- Rule 41(a) –Where the Plaintiff wants to dismiss the case.
3 Ways for a Plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss a case
1) Stipulation of the parties
2) Court Order
3) Plaintiff may dismiss without prejudice once by serving a notice of dismissal before the defendant
serves her answer or motion for summary judgment.
The second time you file a motion to dismiss it is with prejudice - case is over and cannot then go and
reassert the claim.
B. Involuntary Dismissal- Rule 41(b)
Three ways to achieve involuntary dismissal:
1) Failure to Prosecute- plaintiff is not moving to case along –no activity
2) Failure to abide by the Federal Rules
3) Failure to abide by a Court Order
Court can raise these dismissals on their own it does not have to be brought as a motion by the
defendant (link v. maulbauch railroad) but the court will usually warn the plaintiff first through an orderto show cause (OSC)- an order requiring the plaintiff to show good cause as to why the case should not
be dismissed. 12(b) defenses would also constitute grounds for an involuntary dismissal. Any 12(b)
dismissal will serve as a dismissal on the merits meaning that it is dismissed with prejudice and cannot
be brought again unless based on jurisdiction, venue, indispensable parties, or the court said so.
C. Default
1. Rule 55(a) – the Plaintiff must request the entry to default from the clerk of the court when the
defendant has not responded within 20 days after service of process.
Plaintiff cannot receive award from default dismissal unless they get a default judgment under Rule55(b)(1) – can get a default judgment from a clerk of the court(this is when there is a set amount) but if
u don’t meet the requirements to get one from the clerk you go to the judge underRule 55(b)(2)
A plaintiff cannot recover more or a different kind of relief other than what was asked for in the
complaint in a default motion –Rule 55(c)
D. Rule 12(b)(6) Motion- Demurrer - Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim
The court does not look at evidence {unlike in summary judgment}. Instead, it looks only at the face of
the complaint. After reading the complaint the court asks whether if the plaintiff proved everything
stated in the complaint would the plaintiff then win the claim- does the court recognize as a matter of
law what the plaintiff said happened. Ex: plaintiff fails to meet all the elements of a claim
12(b)(6) motions are usually granted with leave to amend- gives the plaintiff another chance to state aclaim.- sometimes more than one chance is given because we like to judge cases on the merits and not
on technicalities.
E. Motion for Summary Judgment – Rule 56
1. Court can look at evidence
2. Standard for granting a Motion of Summary Judgment: Rule 56 (c)
1) Moving party must show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, and
2) that she is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Trial is only to decide issues of fact so if there is no dispute on a major fact the court can just rule as a
matter of law. Court looks at admissible evidence (items under penalty of perjury- depositions,
interrogatories) and admissions. Pleadings are not evidence except if they are verified pleadings-signed
under oath by both parties. Pleadings are relevant in summary judgment because they may contain an
admission- if in answer defendant did not deny a fact asserted in complaint.
Courts reserve all doubts in favor of the non moving party. Summary judgment is always discretionary –
even if you meet the standard the judge does not have to grant the motion. If inferences from the facts
are equally plausible then you must deny summary judgment under matsushita if the judge sees one
inference from the facts to be more plausible than the others then she may grant summary judgment.
The defendant can win on summary judgment by showing that the plaintiff has a whole in the evidence-
forces plaintiff to show evidence. Summary judgment Is rarely granted to the party who has the burden
of proof at trial(plaintiff). Tougher to get SJ in tort cases-credibility is usually issue for the jury to decide.
Judge can never weigh affidavits – decide issue of material fact. Ex: car crash both parties disagree as to
who ran the red light. Defendant moves for SJ providing affidavits from many respectable people. The
plaintiff needs to provide evidence because pleadings are not evidence or he loses. If plaintiff provides
even one affidavit form a druggie SJ cannot be granted because there is a question as to a material issue
of fact.
Can have partial summary judgment granted- knocks out only some of the issues- less issues to litigate-