CIVIL PROCEDURE FALL 2002 CLASS 3 (8/30/02) STAGES AND ESSENTIAL CONCEPTS OF A CIVIL ACTION

1
CIVIL PROCEDUREFALL 2002 CLASS 3
(8/30/02)STAGES AND ESSENTIAL CONCEPTS OF A
CIVIL ACTION

• Columbus School of Law
• The Catholic University of America
• Professor Fischer

2
ANNOUNCEMENTS

• 1. Class 2 slides are now posted on the web page
  at http//faculty.cua.edu/fischer/Civpro02/Slide
  s.htm
• 2. Every student should send me an e-mail by next
  Monday (8/27) at 5 p.m. so I have correct
  addresses

3
WHAT WILL WE COVER TODAY?

• Wrap-up of important points from last class
• Overview of the STAGES and IMPORTANT CONCEPTS of
  a CIVIL ACTION
• Important concepts are italicized in the reading
  assignment
• IMPORTANT NOTE THIS IS A BROAD OUTLINE. DETAILS
  WILL BE FILLED IN OVER THE COURSE OF THE SEMESTER

4
WRAP-UP OF CLASS 2

• Tips for studying law
• U.S. court system state and federal courts
• Difference between civil/criminal cases
• Difference between procedure/substantive law
• Important concepts parties, remedies, joinder

5
STAGES/ESSENTIAL CONCEPTS OF A CIVIL ACTION

• Well look at essential procedural concepts and
  mechanisms for 3 broad stages of a civil action
  in federal district court.
• I. PRE-TRIAL
• II. TRIAL
• III. POST-TRIAL

6
I. PRE-TRIAL PROCEDURE

• 1. CAUSE OF ACTION
• 2. JOINDER OF CLAIMS
• 3. JOINDER OF PARTIES
• 4. JURISDICTION
• 5. VENUE
• 6. PLEADING
• 7. DISCOVERY
• 8. PRE-TRIAL ADJUDICATION

7
1. THE CAUSE OF ACTION

1. COGNIZABILITY
2. CAUSE OF ACTION
3. ELEMENTS OF A CAUSE OF ACTION

8
1. THE CAUSE OF ACTION

• A. COGNIZABILITY Is there a claim in
  substantive law?
• B. CAUSE OF ACTION If the law recognizes a
  wrong, what is the claim? (e.g. negligence,
  breach of contract)
• C. ELEMENTS What components make up the claim?

9
A. COGNIZABILITY

• HYPOTHETICAL Sidra despises the color burgundy.
  Her neighbor, Howard, drives a burgundy BMW.
  Sidra wants to sue Howard to force him to drive a
  different colored car.
• DOES SIDRA HAVE A LEGALLY COGNIZABLE CLAIM
  AGAINST HOWARD?

10
B. CAUSES OF ACTION

• Remember back to the hypothetical involving
  Andrew and George (see 8/21)
• What is/are the CAUSE(S) OF ACTION that Andrew
  has against George?
• What are the ELEMENTS of each such CAUSE OF
  ACTION?

11
C. ELEMENTS OF THE CAUSE OF ACTION

• E.G. ELEMENTS OF THE TORT OF BATTERY
• 1. Intentional and
• 2. Unwanted Touching
• To obtain a remedy in a civil action for battery,
  Andrew must prove ALL of these elements by a
  preponderance of the evidence

12
2. JOINDER OF CLAIMS

• If Andrew wants to raise both a battery cause of
  action and a negligence cause of action against
  G, can A include both in the same lawsuit?

13
2. JOINDER OF CLAIMS

• If Andrew wants to raise both a battery cause of
  action and a negligence cause of action against
  G, can A include both in the same lawsuit?
• See FRCP 18 for rules on joinder of claims - A
  can bring as many claims as he has against G even
  if the claims are unrelated!

14
3. JOINDER OF PARTIES

• If there is more than one potential defendant
  such as G and Doctor Danielle who treated A, can
  A join both as defendants in his action against
  G?
• See FRCP 20 for rules on PERMISSIVE JOINDER
  same transaction or occurrence test
• See FRCP 19 for rules on JOINDER OF NECESSARY
  PARTIES
• More complex joinder rules FRCP 22
  (INTERPLEADER), 23 (CLASS ACTIONS), 24
  (INTERVENTION)

15
4. JURISDICTION

• Sally (CA) trips Joe (OR) on an Oregon street.
  Joe is injured and wants to bring a claim for
  damages for negligence against Sally in the U.S.
  District Court for the Northern District of
  California. Does that court have the power to
  hear Joes claim against Sally? The court must
  have both
• A. PERSONAL JURISDICTION and
• SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
• Does this court have personal jurisdiction?

16
A. PERSONAL JURISDICTION

• Can the California exercise personal jurisdiction
  over Sally?
• The U.S. Constitution permits a states courts to
  exercise personal jurisdiction over a D if
• D has such MINIMUM CONTACTS with the state that
  it would comport with due process to require D to
  defend a lawsuit in that state AND
• The state legislature has not enacted any
  additional limits to personal jurisdiction under
  LONG-ARM STATUTES.
• Remember there may be more than one court that
  can lawfully exercise personal jurisdiction over
  Sally. WHAT ABOUT SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION?

17
B. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

• Can a particular court (e.g. the U.S District
  Court for the Northern District of California)
  hear the type of case (negligence) that Joe is
  bringing against Sally?
• (Assume that the personal jurisdiction
  requirement is satisfied and negligence, a state
  law claim, does not arise under federal law)
• Explain the limits on a federal district courts
  subject matter jurisdiction

18
SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF FEDERAL COURTS IS
LIMITED

• Article III of the U.S. Constitution requires
  Congress to limit the jurisdiction of federal
  courts
• Congress has enacted statutes granting limited
  subject matter jurisdiction to federal courts
  (e.g. 28 U.S.C. 1331 (diversity), 1332
  (federal question))
• AFTER CLASS, TRY TO FIND THESE SECTIONS IN YOUR
  SUPPLEMENT

19
CONTRAST SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF STATE
COURTS

• Subject matter jurisdiction of state courts is
  generally broader than federal courts
• Some state courts are courts of GENERAL
  JURISDICTION (e.g. D.C. Superior Court)
• Some state courts have LIMITED JURISDICTION (e.g.
  Small Claims Court, Traffic Court)
• Sometimes there is CONCURRENT jurisdiction
  between state and federal courts or two state
  courts

20
5. VENUE

• Even if there is personal jurisdiction, there is
  a further question where within a state can a
  case be brought?
• 4 federal judicial districts in CA, 1 in Oregon
• Congress has enacted federal venue legislation
• There are also state statutory venue rules for
  civil actions in state court

21
6. PLEADING

• How do the parties frame their cases?
• A. Complaint
• B. Answer
• C. Counterclaim
• D. Third Party Claim (Impleader)
• E. Cross-Claim

22
A. COMPLAINT

• Written statement of Ps case CB 1040
• Pleading Rules FRCP 7, 8
• Filing Rules FRCP 3
• Service Rules FRCP 4
• Request for a jury
• What is Ds responsive pleading called?

23
B. ANSWER

• Written response by D to Complaint CB 1047
• Pleading Rules FRCP 8
• Filing Rules FRCP 5
• Service Rules FRCP 5
• Might have AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
• Whats a counterclaim? What are the 2 types of
  counterclaims?

24
C. COUNTERCLAIM

• Claim by D against P FRCP 13
• 2 kinds of counterclaims
• (a) COMPULSORY if you dont bring the
  counterclaim youll be barred from doing so in
  future
• PERMISSIVE
• Whats a third party claim?

25
D. THIRD PARTY CLAIM (IMPLEADER)

• D wants to claim against a 3d party for
  reimbursement if D is found liable to P
• CB 1069
• See FRCP 14
• Whats the difference between a third party (or
  impleader) claim and a cross-claim?

26
E. CROSS-CLAIM

• See CB 1071
• Requires at least 2 defendants
• D1 wants to claim against D2
• See FRCP 13(g)

27
7. DISCOVERY

• What information can one party obtain from
  another party to the litigation?
• E.g. INTERROGATORIES (see CB 1079), DEPOSITIONS
  (see CB 1083), REQUESTS TO INSPECT/COPY DOCUMENTS
  (see CB 1077)
• See FRCP 26-37
• Importance of district court rules and individual
  judges rules

28
8. PRE-TRIAL ADJUDICATION

• Not all actions go to trial!
• Contrast with settlement
• MOTION to DISMISS Complaint (FRCP 12(b) - doesnt
  state a cause of action
• MOTION for SUMMARY JUDGMENT (FRCP 56) - e.g.
  after discover it is clear that P cannot win
  his/her case because P has not met burden of
  production on a necessary element

29
II. TRIAL

• 1. RULES FOR CONDUCT OF TRIAL
• 2. ADJUDICATION BEFORE THE END OF TRIAL
• 3. BURDEN OF PERSUASION

30
1. CONDUCT OF TRIAL

• OPENING STATEMENTS
• Ps case (direct examination of witnesses,
  cross-examination by D, re-examination by P) (CB
  1166)
• Rules of EVIDENCE govern admissibility of witness
  testimony (another course)
• Ds case
• CLOSING ARGUMENTS (CB 1191)
• JURY INSTRUCTIONS (CB 1181)
• VERDICT

31
2. ADJUDICATION BEFORE END OF TRIAL

• DIRECTED VERDICT See FRCP 50
• Motion based on other partys failure to meet
  BURDEN OF PRODUCTION on an essential ELEMENT of
  the CAUSE OF ACTION (or DEFENSE)

32
3. BURDEN OF PERSUASION

• What must a plaintiff persuade the fact-finder to
  win a civil action?
• What is the standard for criminal proceedings?

33
III. POST-TRIAL

• 1. ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT
• 2. POST-TRIAL MOTIONS AFFECTING JUDGMENT
• 3. APPEALS
• 4. BINDING EFFECT OF JUDGMENT