CP Checklist.docx
《CP Checklist.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《CP Checklist.docx(28页珍藏版)》请在冰点文库上搜索。
CPChecklist
CivilProcedureChecklist
Catalog
ChapterIPersonalJurisdiction
Threetypesofjurisdiction
TraditionalApproach
ModernApproach
SpecificJurisdiction
GeneralJurisdiction
TechnologicalContacts
JurisdictionoverProperty
TransientPresenceintheForum
Consent
ChallengingaCourt’sJurisdiction
LimitedAppearance`
ChapterIINotice&Opportunitytobeheard
TheRequirementofReasonableNotice
MechanicsofGivingNotice
OpportunitytobeHeard
ChapterIIIAppeal&Finality
SectionATheApplicationofFinality
A.Defining“Finality”
1.CasesInvolvingMultipleClaims
2.DecisionsInvolving“CollateralOrders”
3.DecisionsBasedon“PragmaticFinality”
B.AvoidanceorEvasionoftheBasicConcept–Mandamus
C.DisplacementoftheBasicConcept–DiscoveryAppealsandAppealsofOrdersRegardingInjunctions
SectionBTheTimetoAppeal
SectionCTheAmbitofAppellateReview
A.IssuesSubjecttoReview
B.ScopeofReviewofFacts
1.ThePowertoOrderaNewTrialinaCaseDecidedbyaJury
2.ThePowertoSetAsideaTrialJudge’sFindingsinaNon-JuryCase–Rule52(a)
ChapterIPersonalJurisdiction
Personaljurisdictionandvenuemaybewaived.
Subjectmatterjurisdictioncannotbewaived.
àCapronv.VanNoorden(SubjectMatterJurisdiction:
FailuretoAllegeDiversity)
Keyfacts:
Parguedthathisfailuretoallegehisresidencedeprivedthefederalcourtofdiversityjurisdiction.
Rule:
Evenwherethepartiestoasuitbroughtinfederalcourtappearandconsenttothecourt’sdiversityjurisdiction,ifnoactualdiversityofcitizenshipexistsbetweentheparties,thecourthasnopowertohearthecase.
àTicklev.Barton(ServiceProcuredbyTrickery,DeceitandSubterfuge)
Keyfacts:
AttorneyforTickle(P)luredBarton(D)intoproperjurisdictionforservicebyinvitinghimtoafootballbanquetwithoutdisclosinghisrealpurpose(serviceofsummons).
Rule:
Whereserviceofprocessisprocuredbyfraud,thecourtwillrefusetoexercisejurisdictionandsuchprocesswillbedeemedinvalid.
●Threetypesofjurisdictioninaproceeding
A.Inpersonamjurisdiction:
thecourtexercisesitspowertorenderajudgmentfororagainstapersonbyvirtueofhispresencewithinthestate’sterritoryorhiscitizenshipthere.E.g.侵权之诉Mitchellv.Neff
B.Inremjurisdiction:
thecourtexercisesitspowertodeterminethestatusofpropertylocatedwithinitsterritory,andthedeterminationofthecourtisbindingwithrespecttoallpossibleinterestholdersinthatproperty.
E.g.诉争所有权之诉
C.Quasiinremjurisdiction:
thecourtrendersajudgmentfororagainstaperson,butrecoveryislimitedtothevalueofpropertythatiswithinthejurisdictionandthussubjecttothecourt’sauthority.
-MinimumcontactrequiredinShaffer
Type1:
Thepropertyisrelatedtothecauseofaction.
Type2:
ThepropertyisNOTrelatedtothecauseofaction.
●TraditionalApproach
àPennoyerv.Neff(InappropriateserviceàNOPJ)
Keyfacts:
Suit1:
MitchellsuedNeffforlegalfeesinOregon.Neffwasservedbypublication.ThecourtenteredadefaultjudgmentagainstNeff.ThesheriffsoldthelandthatbelongedtoNefftoPennoyerinordertopaythelegalfeestoMitchell.Suit2:
NeffsuedPennoyertoquitetitleoverthelandindispute.
Rule:
Wheretheobjectoftheactionistodeterminethepersonalrightsandobligationsoftheparties,servicebypublicationagainstnonresidentisineffectivetoconferjurisdictiononthecourt.
àGracev.MacArthur(transientpresenceàPJ)
Keyfacts:
ThecourtupheldtheexerciseofjurisdictionoveradefendantwhowasservedwhilehewasapassengeronacommercialflightfromTennesseetoTexaswhentheplanewasoverArkansas.
Rule:
Aslongasthedefendantwas(voluntarily)presentontheforumstate,thereisnoneedtoconsiderhowlongandwhyhestaythere.(Cf.Ticklev.Barton,inwhichDwasservedbytrickeryandfraud)
àTicklev.Barton(deceitfulserviceànoPJ)
Keyfacts:
Theplaintiff’sattorneymadeaphonecalltodefendant,cheatingthedefendanttocometotheforumstate.Thedefendantwasservedpersonally.
Rule:
Whereserviceofprocessisprocuredbyfraud,thecourtwillrefusetoexerciseitsjurisdictionandturntheplaintiffoutofcourt.
àMillikenv.Meyer(domicileàPJ)
Keyfacts:
Theplaintiffsueddefendant,aWyomingresident,inaWyomingstatecourt.Thecourtenteredadefaultjudgmentagainstthedefendant.Thedefendantchallengedagainstthejudgment(collateralattack).
Rule:
Domicileinthestateisalonesufficienttobringanabsentdefendantwithinthereachofthestate’sjurisdictionforpurposesofapersonaljudgmentbymeansofappropriatesubstitutedservice.
àAdamv.Saenger(acounterclaimsuitagainstplaintiffàPJoverplaintiff)
Rule:
Thecourtcanadoptaprocedurebywhichajudgmentinpersonammayberenderedinacross-actionagainstaplaintiffinitscourt,uponserviceofprocessorofappropriatepleadinguponhisattorneyofrecord.
●ModernApproach
àInternationalShoeCo.v.Washington(MinimumContact;FairPlayandSubstantialJusticeàGPJ)
Keyfacts:
Anon-WashingtoncorporationhiredemployeestosolicitordersandexhibittheirsamplesinWashington.AWashingtonstatuesetupaschemeofunemploymentcompensation,requiringemployerstodefraycontributionstothefund.Thecorporationfailedtodefray.
Rule:
Forastatetosubjectanonresidentdefendanttoinpersonamjurisdiction,dueprocessrequiresthathehavecertainminimumcontactswithitsuchthatthemaintenanceofthesuitdoesnotoffendtraditionalnotionsoffairplayandsubstantialjustice;ContinuousandSystematicactivitiesintheforumstateàGPJ.
●SpecificJurisdictionandStateLong-ArmLaws
LimitationsonPJ:
1)StateStatuteConstraint(Long-ArmStatute)
A.EnumeratedActsStatute:
e.g.FloridaLongArmStatute
B.ConstitutionalMaxStatute:
e.g.CaliforniaLongArmStatute
2)ConstitutionalConstraint(DueProcessClause)
A.MinimumContact:
theQuantityandNatureoftheActivitieswithintheForumState
B.PurposefullyAvailment
C.StreamofCommerce&SOCPlus
D.Foreseeability
E.ChoiceofLawClause
F.FairPlayandSubstantialJustice
a.Thedefendant’sburden;
b.Theforumstate’sinterests;
c.Theplaintiff’sinterests;
d.Thejudicialsystem’sinterest;and
e.Thestate’ssharedinterest.
àGrayv.AmericanRadiator&StandardSanitaryCorp.(Long-ArmStatuteOnly!
)
Keyfacts:
Awaterheaterhadexplodedandinjuredtheplaintiff.
Rule:
Thelong-armstatute“Undersection17
(1)(b)anonresidentwho,eitherinpersonorthroughanagent,commitsatortiousactwithinthisStatesubmitstojurisdiction.”
àMcGeev.InternationalLifeInsuranceCo.(contractofsubstantialconnectionàSPJ)
Keyfacts:
transactionandpremiumsbymail,substantialconnectionbetweenPandD.
Rule:
AcontractwhichhadsubstantialconnectionwiththatStateconferredjurisdictionoverthedefendant.
àHansonv.Denckla(trustcase:
NoMinimumContactàNoSPJ)
Keyfacts:
APennsylvaniaresidentestablishedatrustinDelaware,namingaDelawarebankastrustee.ShethenmovedtoFloridaandexecutedherlastwillandtestament.HertwodaughtersfiledalawsuitinFlorida.AnotherdaughterfiledalawsuitinDelaware.TheCourtheldthatFloridahadnojurisdictionoverthedefendant,trustee.
Rule:
Adefendantmaynotbesubjecttoaforumstatecourt’sjurisdictionunlesshehashadtheminimumcontactswiththatStatethatareaprerequisitetoitsexerciseofpoweroverhim.
DissentingOpinion:
àWorld-WideVolkswagenCorp.v.Woodson(NoMinimumcontact;NoPurposefulAvailmentàNOSPJ)
Keyfacts:
PlaintiffsbroughtanewcarfromdefendantinNewYork.TheydrovethecarintoOklahomaandgotinvolvedintoanaccident.
Rule:
Jurisdictionmaynotbeestablishedonthegroundthatthedefendants’onlyconnectionwiththeforumstateisthefactthataproductsoldinanotherstatebecameinvolvedinanaccidentintheforumstate.
àKeetonv.HustlerMagazine,INC.(MinimumContactàSPJ)
Keyfacts:
ANewYorkresidentbroughtasuitagainstanOhioCorporationinNewHampshire.TheCorporationsold10,000to15,000magazineamonthinthestate.
Rule:
Theactivities(selling10,000to15,000magazines)couldordinarilysatisfytherequirementoftheDueProcessClausethataState’sassertionofpersonaljurisdictionoveranonresidentdefendantbepredicatedon“minimumcontacts”betweenthedefendantandtheState.
àCalderv.Jones(LibelousstoryonamagazineàSPJ)
Keyfacts:
PsuedDbecauseofanarticlepublishedintheDmagazinehavingitslargestcirculationintheforumstate.
Rule:
GivenDhadactedintentionallytoproduceanarticlefordisseminationintheforumstate,Dcouldforeseebeinghaledintocourtthere.
àKulkov.SuperiorCourt(NoPurposefulavailmentàNOSPJ)
Keyfacts:
PsuedDformodificationofachildsupportagreement.Theforumstate’scourtestablishedpersonaljurisdictionbasedonthegroundthatDpurchasedhisdaughter’sairlineticket,committinga“purposefulact”outsidethestatethatcausedaneffectwithinthestate.
Rule:
Merepurchasinghisdaughter’sairlineticketcannotbesaidtohave“purposefullyavailedhimself”ofthebenefitsandprotectionsoftheforumstate’slaws.
àBurgerKingCorp.v.Rudzewicz(Purposefulavailment;Minimumcontact;Fairplay&SubstantialJusticeàSPJ)
Keyfacts:
PsuedDforbreachofthefranchiseagreement.PandDenteredintoafranchiseagreement,providingthatthefranchiserelationshipisestablishedinMiamiandgovernedbyFloridalaw.
Rule:
Priornegotiationsandcontemplatedtrueconsequences,alongwiththetermofthecontractandtheparties’actualcourseofdealingshouldbeevaluatedindeterminingwhe