Civ proprocedural questions presented in civil suits State law applies. In federal court Capron v.

Van Noorden Capron sues Van Noorden for trespass on the case. In suit, stated that Van Noorden was citizen of North Carolina. But it didnt allege Caprons residence. So when he lost, Caprons appeals and says jurisdiction is wrong.

Jurisdiction to mjo (A) subject matterfederal 1. Federal question 2. Diversity/alienage (B)persons (1) Temple (Mississippi) (2) Temple (Mississippi) v. Synthes Corp. : E.D. LA (PA) Dr. LaRocca : LA St. Ct. (St. Charles Hospital (LA))

v.

(12)(b)(17), 19 --states that you should join all relevant parties. Sup. Court Cours of Appeals (13) Court of Claims Tax Courts

District Courts (93) Magistrate courts Bankruptcy courts

*For diversity to be the case, there has to be COMPLETE diversity. If there are three parties, and two of them have same residency, then not complete diversity.

1/17/2012 Alderman v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co. Fed. R. Civ. P. Ref. 56 Alexander v. Kramer Bros. Freight Lines Fed. R. Civ. P. Ref. 51 Because the defense didnt propose different instructions they just objected, then their objection was waved. Diniero v. US Lines Co. 49 Even tho actions extremely harsh, they are forgivable

Texas Employers Insurance Association v. Price Federal Rule of Evidence : 606 Juroros are not allowed to testify to impeach their own verdict. Either wrong on the merits or wrong in terms of the mode or method used to reach outcome of setting aside the verdict. Lavender v. Kurn CF 50 Test Ascertaining validity of a jury verdict Predicated on notion that in our system, there is no review of jury verdict. Is there a legally valid jury review test? Citilla test Is there anything to hang their hat on? Here, Review at supreme court of Missouri was too rigorous in reviewing verdict of plaintiff. Insane jury test Hicks v. US 52 Real question is whether given a set of facts that were supposedly undisputed, did the doctor, was the negligence my misdiagnosing a bowl for a tummy ache. No real dispute as to what facts were. But what conclusion and what does one draw from those facts. The differential standard of DF 52 only determines standards of facts. Des Moines Navigation & R. Co. v. Iowa Homestead Co. 1. Removed, perhaps improperly 2. Iowa st. A court can assert personal jurisdiction only if its power is authorized by statute and does not exceed the limitations of the Due Process Clause of the US Constitution. Pennoyer v. neff 1. Neff v. mitchell Neff owed attorney Mitchell less than $300 in attorney fees in a state Neff was NOT a resident in. He wasnt personally served with process (law suit papers?) and judgment was entered upon his default in not answering the complaint. (he was summoned/made aware by publication). But it was published in Oregon and again Neff is not a resident of Oregon. Judgement for Mitchell because of default Sharriff sale happens. And Mitchell purchases land. Then assigns it to Pennoyer. 2. Neff. V. Pennoyer Issue #1: did court #1 have jurisdiction? Did Oregon st. court have jurisdiction In personam? In rem? Quasi in rem? Issue #2: Was the service valid? method of service by publication: --a notice in a newspaper. Publication is also called constructive service because the court construes it to be effective whether the defendant actually reads the notice or not. Generally, service by publication is allowed only by leave of the court, which usually grants permission only when the plaintiff can show that no other method of service can be effected. Usually the legal notice must be published in at least one newspaper of general circulation where the defendant is likely to be found or where the court is located, or in both places. Ordinarily the notice must be published on more than one occasion, such as once a week for three weeks The levy of the execution is the act by which the officer of the court appropriates the judgment debtor's property to satisfy the command of the writ. Adjudication is the legal process by which an arbiter or judge reviews evidence and argumentation including legal reasoning set forth by opposing parties or litigants to come to a decision which determines rights and obligations between the parties involved.

3 types of jurisdictions: 1. Proceeding in personam a. The court exercises its power to render a judgment for or against a person by virtue of his presence within the states terri tory or his citizenship there. 2. Proceeding in rem a. Court exercises its power to determine the status of property located within its territory, and the determination of the court is binding with respect to all possible interest holders in that property 3. Proceeding quasi-in-rem a. Court renders a judgment for or against a person but recovery is limited to the value of property that is within the jurisdiction and thus subject to the courts authority. Property here was not attached nor in any way brought under the jurisdiction of the court. A levy of execution was the first connection with the case. No adjudication was done. Though court here didnt see attachment essential, they did say that the judgment was invalid from defects in the affidavit upon which the order of publication was obtained and in the affidavit by which the publication was proved. Timing of the notice is important too. If the levy for Neffs land took place in the beginning of the case, then regardless if he knew or not, then the court might have said jurisdiction was correct. The summons itself is the assertion of what up till then is only the potential power to possess land. To actualize the potential, you have to assert the power either physically by arresting or by posting or serving summons. International Shoe Co. v. Washington long arm statutes: state court statutes that intend to extend jurisdiction beyond typical state jurisdictions Gray v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp. A tortuous act is committed where the resulting damage occurs. Issue #1: `````````````Issue #2: Can they get away with it

1/19/2012 Pennoyer Territorial Sovereignty Intl Shoe minimum contacts McGee/Hanson Turning point (tx ins. company that bought out Arizona ins. Companies portfolio) purposeful available 1980s trilogy today World-Wide Burger King Asahi Nicastro

World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson Robinson purchased Audi in NY. Driving through Oklahoma when car blew up --had a long arm statute 1. 1st L-A?

2. DP? Consistend Can an Oklahoma court Forseability is not enough Selling a product that is forseeable mobile, does not automatically fulfill purposeful availment. Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz (breach of contact case) Filing in a federal court does not change the personal jurisdictional issue. There is the same scope of jurisdiction in a federal court as with a state court.

MC-specific juried and in fact did 1. Def. sought to serve af in a ___state; plus 2. Bance of interests/hardships Goodyear vs. _______ Appellant courts says north Carolina had jurisdiction over those entitites. Why? Because Came up on appeal of the jurisdictional ruling.

1/24/2012 Keeton v. Hustler Might not be good lawbut its out there. A non resident of NY brought suit against Hustler in New HAMPSHIRE Hustler was an ohio corp. but sold his products elsewhere In persona jurisdiction was found in new Hampshire. Calder v. Jones National inquired done piece on sweet shirly jones Jones sued editor and author of piece in California even tho they were residents of florida. And the inquire actually is published in florida The effect test-if the defendant seeks to provide and effect in the intended state, then will suffice for jurisdiction. Cocoa v. Lack of minimal contact Intra family dispute. Not a divorce case Merrital status travils with the person. Money is at stake here tho. Ex husband a new Yorker bought a ticket for daughter ort go live with mon in California. A one way ticket. Daughter went to California and ex wife tried to Dd Debateable case o Child support moneyetc. Jurisdiction to adjudicate persons & things power in personam (persons) quasi in rem in rem (things) Notice general specific

Subject Matter

Quasi in remproperty used only to obtain limited in personam. All in rem is a fictionthings dont have right to get adjudication technically. With quasi in rem, additional fiction that law has something to do with the property Pebble beach CO. v. Caddy The effects test (purposeful direction)are you focusing on Tyler v. Judges of the Court of Registration Pennington v. fourth national bank Intangiblesbank accounts and other debts A bank accounted is cited, where the bank is. Harris v. Balk Harris(NC $180)Balk (NC $344)Epstein (MD) Epstein served Hariss with process. Harris was treated as property. His body was attached. And he was summoned to appear in the MD court. Instead of doing that, Harris just pays Epstein. And leaves Balk asks for money when Harris returns, and Harris said I already paid Epstein. Balk sues. NC Courts side with Balk, MD had no jurisdiction. o They didnt have to give full face and credit to the MD judgment cuz they didnt have jurisdiction in the first place over th e debt. o If the first action was properly based on jurisdiction, then it foreclosed the 2 nd action. Supreme court reverses o Says that the obligation of the debtor moves wherever he goes.

Shaffer v. Heitner Sequestration = another form of process. Symbolic arrest. An arrest of illegibly a share of stock in the company that is owned by the true defendants. Stock was was sequestered or attached. Quasi-in rem case None of the stocks/certificates were in Delaware. Chancery = equity Can they use situs rule to get in rem jurisdiction Court says no Are we in a pennoyer world or an international shoe fairness and international justice world? o We are in an international shoe world or at least trying to shift there. Even if we can see it they had stock in deleware, not enough to establish international shoe.

1/26/2012 Burnham v. Superior Court Burnhams lived in NJ. Separate and wife moves to California. Wife filed divorce in California. Ex-husband in California for business and wants to visit the child. Takes child from ex-wifes house, to san Francisco Bay for weekend. When he gets back, hes served with process/divorce papers and then he leaves back to New Jersey. He says. Minimal contact. Just cuz he happened to be in Cali for business, shouldnt there be some kind of fai rness justice pertaining here. He loses in the end. WHY he loses is interesting. Plurality opinion (no opinion of court) there are now 2 branches of due process jurispe --either receive due process by contact, OR Pedigree --if something was generally accepted as fair at the time and before the time of the 24 th amendement, then it is also in accordance with due process regardless if it qualifies under minimal contact or not. So can you serve someone on airplane? In Arkansas, who was neither going or coming from Arkansas?

Tickle v. Barton: Lured into west Virginia by invitation to football award banquet. Questionable if anything fraudulent in the luring, but he was hit with due process when he was in Virginia. In Burnham, he was VOLUNTARILY in California.

Pennoyer, if they have given proper noticethat would be attachment. Ex-post consent Ex-ante consent- you can waive jurisdiction before law suit even arises. Insurance corp. of Ireland v. compagnie des bauxites de guinea Irish company Plaintiff says in order to determine if theres minimal contact, we need to do some discovery. So we want to investigate Irish company and see Defendant refused to cooperate. District court as a sanction for failure to provide discovery, says that through its failure to produce/allow discovery, that then by default there was minimal contact. (cant hide things by not cooperating with discovery).

M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-shore Co. Form selection forms. May be exclusive may not. May say parties consent..or all disputes must be lititaged Consent alone can be the basis for finding a constitutional valid exercise for state constitution. Between the forum and the parties and the litigation. Carnival Cruise Line, INC. v. Shute Pre-printed in ticket that if you have any disputes, you have to dispute in Florida. (even tho cruise Is a west coast trip out of California) Federal or state law?

Limited appearance = associated with quasi in rem Enter an appearance and defend on the merits but only on the basis of some property that has been attached___

Little time of the remainder of the notice material.

1/31/2012 Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. its not adequate in order to satisfy due process challenges, notice must be by means calculated to inform the desired parties, and, where they reside outside the state and their names and addresses are available, notice by publication is insufficient. It is relevant what If letter is returned to sender still not efficient to qualify as notice

Justiciability Art. III o o o o

Case or controversy Hypothetical Mootnesscourts dont decide cases that dont matter anymore. Standing to suein order to be a party to a law suit, you have to have some special relationship to the underlying legality at bar. Some kind of SPECIAL injury to the alleged unlawful act. Not only an injury in fact, but one that is particular to you and not some wide general group. political question Recess appointments Senate says, but we werent in recess. Yes you were. Really nice way for courts to let themselves off the hook when a big political discussion is going on. Rypeness, etc

Subject matter jurisdiction

Absolute divorce = a complete dissolution (ending) of a marriage. Lacks v. Lacks 5015/60(b)(4) $1331 Fed $1332 Diversity diversity; alienate Const = minimal diversity required Stat = completed diversity required = both parties citizens of different states. P1 v. D1 P2 v. D2 P3 Jean-Paul Mas (Alienfrance) v. Perry (Lousiana) Judy Mas (MS?) Facts: Landlord watching grad students through two way mirror in their apartments. Perry says doesnt meet criteria of 1332 Court says: To establish residency: o Have to move to another residence o Have to have the intention to remain there Judy moved to LA but didnt have intention of remaining there. Important because if Judy was from LA, then we would NOT have complete diversity! o Domicile means physical presence plus an intention to remain permanently. o Judy hasnt established a new domicile, therefore she keeps her old domicile until she establishes a new one.

FR GR MS ^^subdivision 3 does NOT apply FR LA MS GR ^^Subdivision 3 applies Where everyone is a US citizen, that works. Where everyone is NOT a US citizen, does not work.

A US citizen, domiciled abroad, Hurn v. Oursler: Rule for determining if a federal court could hear state claim: o If case had 2 distinct grounds in support of a single cause of action, one of which presents a federal question, then court could hear state claim. o BUT if case had 2 separate and distinct causes of action and only one was a federal question, then court could NOT hear state claim. Fyi: Res judicata or res iudicata (RJ), also known as claim preclusion, is the Latin term for "a matter [already] judged", and may refer to two concepts: in both civil law and common law legal systems, a case in which there has been a final judgment and is no longer subject to appeal;[1] and the legal doctrine meant to bar (or preclude) continued litigation of such cases between the same parties, which is different between the two legal systems. In this latter usage, the term is synonymous with "preclusion". res judicata: the matter cannot be raised again, either in the same court or in a different court. A court will use res judicata to deny reconsideration of a matter.[2

2/7/12

Ancillary & Pendent jurisdiction created because sometimes a federal court may be asked to decide matters that if presented independently, would not provide a basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction. Pendent jurisdiction: plaintiff appends a claim lacking an independent basis for federal jurisdiction to a claim possessing such a basis. Doctrine of discretion, NOT of plaintiffs right Justification of appliance, lies in o Considerations of judicial economy o Convenience and fairness to litigants EX: United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs o Changes rule from Hurn v. Oursler o Now, state and federal claims can state separate causes of action so long as they are factually closely related. A v. B2 1 fed A v. B2 one state law v. C Ancillary jurisdiction: plaintiff or defendant injects a claim lacking an independent basis for federal jurisdiction by way of a counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party complaint. A v. B v. C If B drops out however (owen v. Kroger), then this no longer qualify for Ancillary jurisdiction. Pendent parties: (hybrid of pendent and ancillary)

All the jurisdictions (pendent, pendent parties, ancillary) amended into one o supplemental $1367 Limit of # of state law claims that can be carried along with a variable federal law claim?

Case Controversy ^^ Have to arise from a common nucleus of operative fact (CNOF) District court would have discretion to remove state courts case $1441 (c) Main purpose is to Draw distinction between federal question jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction

Finley v. US Amended party case\ Has to be within confines of article 3 Courts say not going to read constitution broadly No 1367 (a) would change decision in Finley o Shall include claims that include the joinder or intervention of additional parties you shouldnt have sued me (B), should have sued C that isnt a 3rd party claim. In general federal practice, you have to have a 3 rd party claim: If Im (B) liable to A, then C is liable to me A v. B v. C In owen, technically wasnt a finger pointing case. A sued B, who in turn brought in C, then B dropped out. A defending party ___ for all or part of the claim against it.

1367(b) takes one category of cases, and carves out off them. Says what kinds of claims that are not under supplemental jurisdiction. Carve out only applies to claims by plaintiffs. In owens, that claim was brought by a plaintiff, so 1367 (b) was not applicable.-+

9360 (1) Allapattah v. Exx 10,000 Class members (2) Ortega v. StarKist Little girl met jurisdiction, but family/parents did not. Does the supplemental jurisdiction standard for 1367 (b) include claims by plaintiffs that dont meet the jurisdictional amount even when there is diversity of citizenship.

2/9/2012 Introductory lecture =mandatory Executive Software North America, Inc. v. United States District Court for the Central District of California Writ of mandamus = style of procedural history Supplemental jurisdiction: claims that would NOT satisfy federal jurisdiction (either by diversity or federal question) ST FED S S I I T(removal) T (Remand)

Borough of West Mifflin v. Lancaster **1367 allows to send back state law claims, but not federal The only type of remand that is not Trivial things like if the court extend suplimental jursidction Serious, whether court had substantial jurisdiction is not granted review If u show up in case number 2 and case goes against u in term of subject matter jurisdiction, then you cant win in 2 nd case that references first case.??? If the party that wants to challenge subject matter jurisdiction in case number 1, shows up, held to be bound by res judicata. All courts can be presumed to have jurisdiction, so if they make a ruling or can be deemed to have made a ruling, then the matter is closed as to litigation. Not showing up doesnt really help if you should have showed up.

Venue:

Venue can be easily waived if not raised early on in the case Consult your local statutes Inside state venues probably means a county State and federal cases both have venues.

Hofman v. Blaski Defendents moved to transfer Plaintiffs didnt want to be in Illinois tho. They read might have been brought to mean could have been brought so they looked at it as a rightwithout consulting the defendant.reslolved whether 14kllllllllll 2/14/2012 1404 1406 1631 Tof tee v. forum non conveniens

$1367(c) 1441(c) Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno

The default rule is that you apply state law. Where federal law applies, it applies and it supersedes state lawsupremacy clause.

Swift v. Tyson Erie v. Tompkins Plaintiff was a bum walking near a railroad In Pennsylvania Black object that looked like a door, protruding from the train, smacks him and cuts his arms off. Sues defendents in Federal court. But train based in New York. Ruled the bum was a treaspasser. So no duty? -District court applies general law/majority rule: ordinary care to a traveler on the path. Supreme court reverses and overrules swift. Why? o Uniformality (Between state and federal courts and federal courts decision cant be the same state. Brandic now seems to be saying that you cant do that i f u are doing it to allow federa

lo What he hinges on is hat in switft th putin ql Whole mission swas to destroy l3nnn Guaranty trust co v. York

Its a test that cant work Whatever it is that you are arguing about is ex-post. Outcome determinable. How can u look at things ex-ante? Its not outcome determinable.+++++++++

Felder v. casey Police stop and question Bobby Felder while searching neighborhood for armed suspect Interrogation turns hostile and loud and attracts Bobbys family and neighbors They convince police Bobby is not the man they are looking for Police report: o Officer tells them to go home, o Bobby continues to argue and allegedly pushed one of them o Police arrest him for disorderly conduct Bobby claims: o During arrest, officers beat him about the head and face with batons o Dragged him across the ground o Threw him partially unconscious in to the back of a paddy wagon face first o All in view of his family and neighbors

Neighbors complain and a local city alderman and members of the Milwaukee Police Department arrive and begin interviewing witnesses to the arrest 3 days later local alderman wrote directly to chief of police requesting full investigation Bobby (black) claims: o Various members of police department responded to this request by conspiring to cover up the misconduct of the arresting officers, all of whom are white Department took no disciplinary action against them City attorney dropped the disorderly conduct charge against petitioner 9 months later, bobby filed this action agains the Milwaukee county Circuit Court against the city of Milwaukee and certain police officers o Claimed beating and arrest were unprovoked and racially motivated and violated his rights under 4 th and 14 amendment. o Sought redress under 42. U.S.C. $1983, n1

Officers try and get dismissal cuz Bobby failed to comply with states notice-of-claim statute. Also aside from 120 day notice, slaimants must bring suit within 6 months (180) [2 month action time then] of receiving notice that their claim has been disallowed. Court of appeals say notice-of-claim statute inapplicable to federal civil rights actions brought in state court. Wisconsin supreme court reverses o They say states retain authority under constitution to prescribe the rules and procedures that govern actions in their own tribunals.

Reversed;

Issue: is the application of the States notice -of-claim provision to $1983 actions brought in state courts consistent with the goals of the federal civil rights laws, or does the enforcement of such requirement instead stand as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress?

Supremacy Clause of the Federal Constitutiton: Relative importance of the State of its own law is not material when there is a conflict with a valid federal law. Any state law, that is clearly w/in states acknowledged power, which interferes w/or is contrary to federal law, must yield. Notice-of-claim conflicts both in its purpose and effects with the remedial objectives of $1983, concluded $1983 supersedes state law when brought in a state court. A state law that immunizes government conduct otherwise subject to suit under $1983, is preempted even where the federal civil rights litigation takes place in state courtcuz application of the state immunity law would thwart the congressional remedywhich already provides certain immunities for state officials. kkkkk

McMillan v. McMillan Glenna Jennigns McMillan injured Dec. 26, 1975 while riding in an automobile which collided with a bridge in Tennessee. Vehicle operated by her husband, David McMillan. Plaintiff sued court charging defendant negligently caused the accident and her injuries. Parties were domiciled in Virginia In TN, no rise of action, no suit may be mainted for tort committed during coverture by one spouse against the other. o Abolished in Virginia by Surratt v. Thompson Trial court sustained husbands motion to dismissruling that Tennessee law applied because of Virginia rule that law of the situs (situation/origin) of the tort governs the substantive rights of the parties Plaintiff appeals contending: o Virginia should abandon the orthodox place-of-the-wrong rule, and embrace a modern rule o Disabilities to sue and immunities from suit stemming from the family relationship are more appropriately determined by reference to the law of the state of the family domicile. o Virginia is clearly the state with the prevailing interest in this action and they should apply their own laws o most significant relationship Courts say usually will do most significant relationship/center of gravity, but wont this time. o Formula can be viewed differently from case to case thereby creating uncertainty and confusion in application of the theory o EX: Babcock, automobile guest, sued her host in New York for injuries sustained in Ontario caused by the defendants ordinary negligence. Under NY law, guest could recover for injuries caused by hostss lack of ordinary care Ontario guest statute barred such a recovery Court abandoned is place-of-the-wrong rule and permitted recovery Decided that on the guest-host issue, NY had the dominant contacts cuz the parties were domiciled in NY and were travelling in a behicle registered and regularly garaged in NY. Ontario had no connection w/ the cause of action except that the accident happened to take place there. o Kell Issue: NY ordinary negligence rule applies? Or Ontario guest statute controlled. Guest injured by hosts ordinary negligence while, Ontario residents on a trip in Nyew York which was to begin and end in Ontario NY court purported to follow Babcock, but held Ontario law would not apply. No erro in action of the trila court. Judgment in favor of the defendanthusband. Paul v. National Life Accident Co. September 1977 Eliza Vickers and Aloha Jane Paul, west Virginia residents, took weekend trip to Indiana Involved in a 1-car collision on intertstate 65 in IndianaMrs. Vickers lost control of the car Both women died Administrator of Mrs. Pauls estate brought wrongful death action agains t Ms. Vickers estate and the National Life Accident Company in the Circuit Court of Kanawha Country Defendants moved for summary judgment 1. Indiana guest statute which grants to a gratuitous host immunity from liability for the injury or death of a passenger unless the host was guilty of willful and wanton misconduct at the time of the accident, was applicable

2. Record was devoid of any evidence of willful or wanton misconduct on the part of Ms. Vickers. October 1984, defendants get summary judgment Law of place of injury, Indiana, applied to this case and no willful or wanton misconduct on Ms. Vickers part. Plaintiffs appeal Issue: law of Indiana or West Virginia applies? Appellees (defendants) say use lex loci delicti @place of tort Appellants (plaintiff) says reject @place of tort and adopt modern approach Judgment reversed and remanded (even tho they generally use lex loci delicti rule.) Apply state law where tort happened unless it goes against public policy.

Choice of law issues can win or lose a case

All State Insurance Co. V. Hague Ralp Hague, died Passanger on a Motorcycle and it was struck from behind by an automobile Accident occurred in Pierce County, Wis.immediately across from Minnesota border from Red Wing, Minn. Operators of both vehicles were Wisconsin residents, so was Mr. Hague o Mr. Hague resided with wife in Hager City, Wis. (1.5 miles from Red Wing.) Mr. Hague employed in Red Wing for 15 years Commuted daily from Wisconsin to Red Wing for work. Neither operator of motorcycle nor automobile carried valid insurance. Mr. Hague had a policy issued by Allstate Insurance Co. o It covered 3 automobiles owned by him o contained an uninsured motorist clause insuring him agains loss incurred from accidents with uninsured motorists. Limited to $15,000 for each automobile Wife moved to Red Wing after accident, but before suit She married Minnesota resident and established residence there with her new husband in Savage, Minn. Same time, Minnesota Registrar of Probate appointed her personal representative of her late husbands estate. Husband had 3 cars and so when ex-wife sued and they told her 15,000 was what she would get, she argued and said each car was insured and that she should be able to stack all the claims together and receive a total of $45,000. Courts say no, Wisconsin law wont allow stacking. So wife goes to Minnesota law, and they apply that. Cc

3/1/2012 ` Claim preclusion Unit of Analysis claim Scope of Preclusion could have been as part of same claim

Res judicata

(1)STOO; (2)Ind. Parties issue fact/law med/ult

Issue preclusion

actually litigated actually decided Necessarily decided

Collateral estoppel

Usually dissent judgment does nothave collateral effect Russell v. place Validity Claim 1 Claim 2 Infringe

Either path was insufficient to support the same judgment No collateral estoppel Plaintiff wone every issue in case number 1

Neither 1 was a lone, necessary, cut both were sufgficient If a judgment is equally supported by two independent grounds, neither one is ok for collateral estoppels cuz neither on e is necessarily decided. Pop day v. davis v. rios Rios v. davis 3/29/2012 Can only serve your suit once Krupski v. costa crociere a) State law b) Partial test c) Change a party if party to be brought in receives notice and believes should be brought to them but for mistake.

Should have known. If you are defendant you have to look out not only for cases that have been brought against you, but also should have been brought against you. Statute of limitations are not the type protections as they once were.

Eerie Doctrine: State law applies in federal court Is what it is no matter what. No

Res judicada

Claims You can bring a cross claim or 3rd party claim if__ Always have a In theory 3rd party claims can continue indefinitely

Read through the walmart case (class actions) Interplederpage 7-12 713-22-33

Matter relevancypart of every discovery section Emateriality element of cd or def Used to be: Any matter not privilege that is relavant to subject matter of the element. Expert or scientific evidence nedooooob-24 has been___to funcitonly overrule both functionings by the c

Default used strategically by defendants Defaults is where defendants dont show up at all. Didnt do anything. Coulas v. Smith Showed up late to court Doesnt qualify as default explained in rule 55.

Default is administerial act by a clerk. Default judgment can only be noted by clerk if you have liquidated damages. Vulnerable to being reopened at any time. Because if the default is made without any participation by defendant then they have an unadvantageous advantage. They havent had their time at court/right to defend themselves, etc.

Beacon Theaters, Inc. v. Westover Only under the most impartiv Law trumps equity First try and classify/identify the cause of action and the issues.

The nature of the remedy is quite important. Whatever issues there are are kind of characterize by whatever issues there are with the case.

4/3/2012 Interpleader --stakeholder (trustees, etc. --nature of interpleder: to address a situation in which the stakeholder wants to turn the table anticipate the prospects of future litigation that binds all the future potential parties that are called claimants. --illuminate who the somebody elses are, and how much. Claim by defenedents of parties joined under Rule 37 Dont confuse with impleader --completely routine thing. --3rd party practice --A.v.B v. C --B v. C. = impleader. (Rule 22) --in order to impleaded claim mnust be that C may or is liable for all of the __ to A. --way to accelerate the adjudication of a case. Vouching in --have to have personal jurisdiction --goverened by ordinarly rooms of subject matter and personal jurisdiction. You can use this procedure even over a party the court cannot get personal jurisdiction. Commonly used by Insurers to stop collateral effed.

In this area, Richmond, Alexandria, and ___ are where you can get summons. If you reside on the other side of Baltimore, you are going to get your summons from Alexandria, so you can maximize your _____ Rule interpleder==has its own special rule Statutory interpleder = --created in order to accommodate a broader scope of interpleader $1335, $1397, $2361

S.Discovery is frequently or commonly used as a predatory device, to wear down the other side. When trying to get a ?merit.? Moral hazardthe party demanind the good doesnt internalize the cost thereof. Pple ill internalize more if someone else is paying the bill. Therefore they demand too much, therefore creates inflation problem. --can make the same argument about healthcare, education, easy mortgaging, etc.

P D + C P D - C PD - PD + C + C (Probability hes going to lose)(Damages if he loses) (probability plaintiff wins)(Probability of Damages if he wins)

Hickman v. Taylor Kelly v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co.

Difference between discovery facts and information And difference between discovering the other sides case. Wanted to know how plaintiff was going to go about their case vs. info about facts/information that is relevant. Discovery is designed to get information that the other guy has. Right to own their own thought process Start with UpJohn next class

4/17/2012 Law of evidence 1. In background in terms of discovery a. Whole relevance standard comes out of rules of evidence b. Limited by priviledge which also comes out of rules of evidence 2. Summary judgment a. -whether evidence can or could be admissible force (aside from logical relevance) b. Assigns to finder of factjury 3. Law of evidence is a jury controlled device for the most part 4. Judgment as matter of law (2) Summary judgment Law of evidence is a jury controlled device for the most part Ex. If u cant get by hearsay statement, then jury cant hear it and jury cant give its verdict

Motion for a directed verdict (if it was made prior to a verdict) Motion for judgment not with-standing the verdict (if made AFTER the verdict)non abstante verdicto i.e. judgment N.O.V --burden of production. Trial issue, of material fact. If the plaintiff party has come forward (burden of going forward) with evidence (that has actually been allowed into trial record) sufficient to sustain a jury verdict in his/her favor on each of th e essential elements of that partys burden. On one or more essential elements of that partys burden. Traditionally called substantial evidence. Not called that any more tho, it is now called Remitter - jury does not want to admit Ur in the protective class, ur treated differently. --------------Unless u arguing exactly point that appeal says, then u wave the appeal. (rule 51?) Adjudication without a trial(not included in lecture notes)

Review: front Erie Federal State Reverse Erie State Federa.

Forum Jurisdiction Claim Jurisdiction

Not a case sharing a common nucleaus of facts.united mine workers. $1367 b What would make a case be applicable with (c) and not b? if only a case that is broader than a case. Haywood robinson