Subject Matter · Personal · Jurisdiction — need both to proceed
Subject Matter · Personal · Jurisdiction — need both to proceed
Before any federal court can hear a case, it needs two green lights: Subject Matter Jurisdiction (the right kind of case) AND Personal Jurisdiction (power over the defendant). Miss either one and the case gets dismissed — no matter how strong the merits. SPJ = both required, always.
Federal question SMJ
Case arises under federal law, treaties, or the Constitution (28 U.S.C. §1331). No amount-in-controversy requirement.
Diversity SMJ
Complete diversity of citizenship (no plaintiff same state as any defendant) + amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 (28 U.S.C. §1332).
Personal jurisdiction
Power over the defendant — requires either presence, domicile, consent, or minimum contacts with the forum state (Int'l Shoe).
Pleadings
CAN
Complaint · Answer · (possible) counterclaim/cross-claim · Notice pleading standard
Complaint · Answer · (possible) counterclaim/cross-claim · Notice pleading standard
A civil case begins with pleadings. CAN: Complaint (plaintiff's claim) → Answer (defendant's response, must be filed within 21 days in federal court) → possible counterclaims or cross-claims. Federal courts use notice pleading — plausible claim, not detailed proof (Twombly/Iqbal standard).
Complaint
Must contain: short plain statement of jurisdiction · short plain statement of the claim showing entitlement to relief · demand for relief (FRCP Rule 8).
Twombly/Iqbal
Pleading must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim — not just possible. Conclusory labels and legal conclusions don't count.
Answer
Defendant must admit, deny, or state lack of knowledge for each allegation. Affirmative defenses must be raised or they're waived.
Venue & Removal
WARD (W=Where defendant resides, A=Activities giving rise to claim, R=Removal to federal court, D=Discretionary transfer)
Where defendant resides · Any district where events occurred · Removal · Diversity cases
Where defendant resides · Any district where events occurred · Removal · Diversity cases
Even with proper jurisdiction, the case must be in the right district. WARD: venue is proper Where defendant resides, Any district where substantial events occurred, or where any defendant resides if all defendants are in the same state. Defendants can Remove state cases to federal court if federal jurisdiction exists.
Venue (28 USC §1391)
Proper in: district where any defendant resides (if all in same state) OR where substantial part of events occurred OR where any defendant subject to PJ (if no other district works).
Transfer
Court may transfer to any district where case could have been filed, for convenience of parties and witnesses or in interest of justice (§1404).
Removal
Defendant removes state case to federal court within 30 days of service. All defendants must agree. Plaintiff cannot remove. Cannot remove diversity case if any defendant is a citizen of the forum state.
Discovery
DRIED (D=Depositions, R=Requests for production, I=Interrogatories, E=Examination, D=Disclosures)
Depositions · Requests for production · Interrogatories · Expert disclosures · Document requests
Depositions · Requests for production · Interrogatories · Expert disclosures · Document requests
Discovery is the pre-trial exchange of information. DRIED covers the main tools: Depositions (sworn oral testimony) · Requests for production (documents/things) · Interrogatories (written questions, answered under oath) · Expert disclosures · ESI (electronically stored information). Scope: anything relevant and not privileged.
Depositions
Oral examination of a witness under oath, recorded by a court reporter. Can depose any person, not just parties. Limited to 10 per side (FRCP).
Interrogatories
Written questions answered in writing under oath. Only served on parties (not non-party witnesses). Limited to 25 per side in federal court.
Work product doctrine
Attorney's mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, and legal theories prepared in anticipation of litigation are protected from discovery.
Summary Judgment
NGGD (N=No genuine dispute, G=of a material fact, G=moving party is entitled to judgment, D=as a matter of law) — summary judgment standard
No Genuine dispute of material fact · Judge decides as a matter of law
No Genuine dispute of material fact · Judge decides as a matter of law
Summary judgment (Rule 56) lets a court end a case before trial when there's no genuine dispute about the material facts — only a legal question remains. NGGD: No Genuine dispute of material fact → Judge Decides as a matter of law. The non-moving party gets all reasonable inferences in their favor.
Standard
Moving party must show no genuine dispute of material fact. Non-moving party must point to specific evidence — cannot rest on allegations alone (Celotex).
Material fact
A fact that could affect the outcome under governing law. Disputes about immaterial facts don't preclude summary judgment.
Genuine dispute
A reasonable jury could return a verdict for the non-moving party. If no reasonable jury could, summary judgment is appropriate.
Erie Doctrine
Erie Doctrine (E=state law on substantive matters, R=federal rules on procedure, I=Identical outcome test, E=Equity and fairness) = State law on substance · Federal law on procedure
Erie Railroad v. Tompkins — no federal general common law
Erie Railroad v. Tompkins — no federal general common law
In diversity cases, federal courts apply state substantive law but federal procedural law. ERIE: Erie Railroad v. Tompkins (1938) overruled Swift v. Tyson — there is no federal general common law. Outcome determinative test: if the choice of law would significantly affect the outcome, it's substantive → apply state law.
Substance vs. procedure
Substantive (state): elements of claims, statutes of limitations, standards of liability. Procedural (federal): pleading standards, discovery rules, trial procedures.
Outcome determinative
Guaranty Trust test: would applying federal vs. state law significantly affect the outcome? If yes → substantive → apply state law.
Hanna v. Plumer
If a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure directly conflicts with state law, the FRCP governs if it's valid under the Rules Enabling Act.
Class Actions
CANT (C=Commonality, A=Adequacy of representation, N=Numerosity, T=Typicality) — Rule 23 class action requirements
Commonality · Adequacy · Numerosity · Typicality
Commonality · Adequacy · Numerosity · Typicality
A class action lets many plaintiffs sue together under Rule 23. CANT covers the four prerequisites that must ALL be satisfied: Commonality (shared legal questions) · Adequacy (representative adequately protects the class) · Numerosity (so many members individual suits are impracticable) · Typicality (rep's claims typical of the class).
Numerosity
Class so numerous joinder of all members is impracticable. No magic number — courts look at size, geography, and practicality. Often 40+ members suffice.
Commonality
Questions of law or fact common to the class. At least one common question whose answer will resolve an issue central to all claims (Wal-Mart v. Dukes).
Typicality
Representative's claims arise from the same event or practice and are based on the same legal theory as class members' claims.
Res Judicata (claim preclusion) · Collateral Estoppel (issue preclusion)
Res Judicata (claim preclusion) · Collateral Estoppel (issue preclusion)
Preclusion doctrines prevent relitigation. RJ = Res Judicata (claim preclusion): a final judgment on the merits bars all claims that were or could have been raised in the first suit. CJ = Collateral Estoppel (issue preclusion): a specific issue actually litigated and decided cannot be relitigated.
Res judicata elements
Same parties (or those in privity) · same claim (transactional test — same nucleus of facts) · final judgment on the merits · by a court of competent jurisdiction.
Collateral estoppel
Issue was actually litigated · actually decided · essential to the prior judgment · same party to be bound was a party in the prior action.
Non-mutual CE
Offensive: new plaintiff uses prior finding against defendant (allowed but courts have discretion). Defensive: defendant uses prior finding against plaintiff (generally allowed).
Appeals
FIND (F=Final judgment rule, I=Issues must be preserved, N=No new evidence, D=Deferential review standards)
Final judgment rule · Interlocutory exceptions · New trial motions · De novo vs. clear error
Final judgment rule · Interlocutory exceptions · New trial motions · De novo vs. clear error
Appeals are not automatic do-overs. FIND: Final judgment rule — courts of appeals only review final decisions · Interlocutory exceptions exist (injunctions, collateral orders) · New trial motions must be filed first · Standard of review matters: De novo for legal questions, clear error for facts, abuse of discretion for judge's choices.
Final judgment rule
28 USC §1291: courts of appeals jurisdiction over final decisions only — no piecemeal appeals. Must wait until case fully resolved below.
Interlocutory appeals
Exceptions: §1292(a) injunctions · collateral order doctrine (Cohen) · §1292(b) certified questions · mandamus for extraordinary cases.
Standards of review
De novo (fresh): legal questions, statutory interpretation. Clear error: factual findings (highly deferential). Abuse of discretion: evidentiary rulings, procedural decisions.
🎓 Common Exam Questions
Q: What does SPJ stand for and explain the minimum contacts test for personal jurisdiction?
A: SPJ (Subject matter jurisdiction, Personal jurisdiction): two threshold requirements a court must have to hear a case — lack of either voids the judgment. Subject matter jurisdiction (SMJ): federal courts have SMJ for (1) federal questions (claims arising under federal law, Constitution, or treaties) or (2) diversity jurisdiction (parties from different states + amount in controversy exceeds $75,000). Personal jurisdiction (PJ): the court's power over the defendant. International Shoe Co. v. Washington (1945): due process requires the defendant have minimum contacts with the forum state such that maintaining the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Specific jurisdiction: the claim arises from the defendant's contacts with the forum. General jurisdiction: defendant so continuously and systematically present they can be sued for anything (Daimler AG — only for principal place of business or state of incorporation for corporations).
Q: What does DRIED stand for and what are the scope and limits of discovery?
A: DRIED (Depositions, Requests for production, Interrogatories, Examination, Disclosures): the five main discovery tools under FRCP. Scope of discovery (FRCP Rule 26(b)(1)): parties may discover any nonprivileged matter relevant to any party's claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case. Proportionality factors: importance of issues, amount in controversy, parties' resources, importance of discovery in resolving issues, burden vs. benefit. Privilege: attorney-client privilege (confidential communications between attorney and client for legal advice) and work product doctrine (attorney's mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, legal theories) are NOT discoverable. ESI (Electronically Stored Information): a major modern discovery battleground — parties must preserve ESI once litigation is reasonably anticipated (litigation hold) or face spoliation sanctions.
Q: What is the Erie Doctrine and why does it matter?
A: Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins (1938): in diversity cases, federal courts must apply state substantive law but federal procedural law. Overruled Swift v. Tyson (1842) which had allowed federal courts to create a federal common law. Why Erie matters: prevents forum shopping — if federal courts could apply different substantive law, plaintiffs would always choose federal court whenever favorable. The key question is whether a rule is substantive (outcome-determinative, apply state law) or procedural (how the case is litigated, apply federal rules). Gray areas (Hanna v. Plumer test): if a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure directly conflicts with state law, the federal rule applies if it is valid (within Congress's constitutional power and does not abridge substantive rights). Practice: statute of limitations, elements of a claim, burden of proof = state law. Discovery rules, pleading standards, service of process = federal rules.
Q: What does CANT stand for and how does class certification work?
A: CANT (Commonality, Adequacy, Numerosity, Typicality): the four prerequisites of FRCP Rule 23(a) that ALL class actions must satisfy. Plus, the class must fit into one of Rule 23(b)'s three categories: (1) inconsistent judgments risk (injunctive classes), (2) injunctive or declaratory relief classes, or (3) common questions predominate and class action is superior method (most damages class actions). Commonality: at least one common question of law or fact (Walmart v. Dukes made this a high bar — must be capable of classwide resolution). Numerosity: so many members that joinder is impracticable — courts look at numbers, geographic dispersion, and ability to file individually. Typicality: named plaintiffs' claims arise from the same course of conduct and same legal theory. Adequacy: named plaintiffs and class counsel will vigorously protect class interests — no conflicts of interest. Settlement classes require court approval under Rule 23(e).
Q: What is claim preclusion (RJ) and issue preclusion (CJ)?
A: Preclusion doctrines prevent relitigation to promote finality. Claim preclusion (res judicata, RJ): a final judgment on the merits bars all claims that were or could have been raised in the original action between the same parties or their privies. Four requirements: (1) final judgment on the merits, (2) same parties or privies, (3) same claim or cause of action (transactional test — all claims arising from the same transaction), (4) court had jurisdiction. Issue preclusion (collateral estoppel, CJ): prevents relitigation of a specific issue that was: (1) actually litigated and contested, (2) necessary to the prior judgment, (3) by same parties (though some courts allow non-mutual offensive collateral estoppel). Key distinction: RJ bars the entire claim even if not actually litigated. CJ only bars issues actually decided. Default judgments satisfy RJ but generally not CJ.