1True or false: If one service method fails, another method under the Mullane standard must be made to constitute the delivery of proper notice of the pendency of the action
True
2When should notice be posted instead of mailed to the party?
Only when there are no better alternatives remaining to deliver notice to the party
3True or false: Rule 4 permits the process of service via first-class mail
False, however a state's law may allow for service via mail, and service may be made in accordance with a state's law
4True or false: Under Rule 4, service may be performed on someone of a suitable age and discretion of an individual who resides at the party's dwelling or abode, even if they are not related to the party or underage
True
5True or false: Service of process on individuals must be performed via in-person delivery to the party, in-person drop-off with someone of a suitable age at the party's dwelling or abode where the party resides, or in-person delivery to an authorized agent
False, while these are permissible under Rule 4(e), a state's laws may permit additional methods of service, including by mail
6True or false: There is no provision under Rule 4 for stopping or resetting the 90-day time period to perform service when the party had declined to waive service
True, and because of this the 90-day time period to perform service from the date of the complaint's filing will continue to toll after the party has declined to waive service
7When performing service on a party who is outside of the forum-state, which state's law controls for appropriate methods of service?
The state where service is to be made, not the forum-state where the action is pending
8A lawful permanent resident/alien with state A citizenship sues a corporation with foreign citizenship and state B citizenship. Amount in controversy aside, is there subject matter jurisdiction? Why or why not
No, because alien vs alien jurisdiction is not allowed, even if a foreign corporation also has state citizenship. There would need to be at least one US citizen, on either side of the action.
9True or false: A corporation with dual citizenship (foreign and US state) is still considered an alien for diversity jurisdiction purposes
True
10True or false: A lawful permanent resident/alien can sue a foreign corporation
False, this represents "alien vs alien" jurisdiction, which is not permitted under the diversity statute.
11True or false: A corporation that also has US state citizenship but is foreign will override its alien status
False, so another alien can't sue them, unless there's at least one US citizen on either side of the action
12True or false: A defendant's counterclaim against a plaintiff whose claim does not satisfy the amount in controversy requirement may aggregate their claim with the plaintiff's claim in order to satisfy the amount in controversy requirement
False, because supplemental jurisdiction would only extend to a claim when the independent claim satisfies subject matter jurisdiction independently
13True or false: For the purposes of determining whether a claim can be aggregated, the anchor claim need only meet one type of subject matter jurisdiction (federal or diversity)
True, subject matter jurisdiction may be satisfied by one or the other, it need not be both
14True or false: If a plaintiff's claim against one defendant meets federal question jurisdiction, they may also add an additional state law claim against another defendant
True, as long as the two defendants share a common nucleus of operative facts
15What are three ways in which a federal court may exercise jurisdiction over a class action lawsuit?
1) Federal-question jurisdiction: At least one plaintiff's claim alleges a federal law violation
2) Traditional diversity jurisdiction: Complete diversity in which no P shares citizenship with any D + each P's claim must exceed $75k
3) Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA): Minimal diversity, class size is 100+, aggregation value exceeds $5 mil
16True or false: The assertion of a federal defense cannot be the basis for a removal from state to federal court
True, the plaintiff is the master of their complaint
17What is the defendant unanymity rule?
All defendants must consent to removal
18True or false: Supplemental jurisdiction only extends to claims when the court already has original jurisdiction over at least one claim
True
19If one claim in an action individually meets subject matter jurisdiction through federal question, and the amount in controversy is less than what diversity jurisdiction requires, can a state law violation claim be raised also for a value less than the amount in controversy? Why or why not?
Yes, because the court will already have subject matter jurisdiction on the basis of federal question jurisdiction, an additional state law claim may be joined because the amount in controversy would be irrelevant.
20What are the two permitted ways to aggregate claims under the aggregation rule?
1) One plaintiff may combine multiple claims against one defendant regardless of whether or not those claims share the same common set of operative facts
2) Multiple plaintiffs may combine their claims against one defendant when they share the same title or right, representing their "common undivided interest"
21What are the steps of a supplemental jurisdiction analysis?
1) Does the anchor claim meets SMJ independently? (through diversity or federal question)
2) Do the claims share the same case or controversy? (common nucleus of operative facts/same transaction or occurence)
3) Are there statutory limitations? (Ps can't use supplemental jx against joined parties if the anchor claim is based on diversity and complete diversity would be destroyed)
4) Should the court actually should exercise jurisdiction? (are there novel issues raised by state law claims? do state law claims substantially predominate federal law claims? have federal claims already been dismissed?)
22True or false: Tag jurisdiction allows courts to have personal jurisdiction over a defendant
True
23True or false: If a federal statute authorizes nationwide service of process, a federal court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a party in any federal district
True, because Due Process considers a party's contacts with the US as a whole, not with any particular state
24True or false: Merely contracting with a party satisfies the minimum contacts requirement
False. Specific performance of the contract in a specific state, or negotiation of the contract in a specific state, would satisfy the requirement.
25True or false: A party that has an office or plant in a specific state satisfies the sufficient minimum contact requirement for that state
False, minimum contacts need to arise out of or relate to the claim
26True or false: A party who purposefully availed itself to a state's roads who gets into an incident in that state will meet the specific personal jurisdiction requirements
True
27True or false: Tag jurisdiction is for individuals only, not corporations
True
28True or false: A party is only responsible for their own purposeful contacts with a forum-state, not the adverse party's purposeful contacts
True
29True or false: A party must have the expectation that a product will be marketed and/or sold within a state for specific personal jurisdiction to apply
True
30True or false: Judges may consider convenience standards in response to motions to transfer venue, but not in motions to dimiss for improper venue
True
31True or false: For venue purpose, "substantial part of events" may refer to the incident giving rise to the claim itself, or any events relating to the plaintiff's asserted theory of liability, even if those have different districts
True
32True or false: A court would be able to transfer venue if a defendant lacks personal jurisdiction in the transferee court
False
33True or false: Foreign corporations reside in any judicial district in which they would be subject to personal jurisdiction
True
34True or false: Failure to perform a contract in a specific judicial district may make venue proper in that district
True
35Recall the venue statute (first two prongs + fallback provision)
1) A district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same state
2) A district where a substantial part of the vents giving rise to the claimoccured
Fallback (only when 1 and 2 fail to apply): Any district where a defendant would be subject to personal jurisdiction
36What are some convenience standards a court may consider in determining how to rule on a motion to transfer venue?
The location of the evidence or witnesses, the location of the incident, and the plaintiff's choice of forum
37True or false: Rule 12(b) defenses must be made in a defendant’s initial response, either by motion or by answer
True, the defendant can raise the defenses in either, as long as they're all raised in the first response
38True or false: Insufficient service of process is a waivable defense
True
39True or false: A court may dismiss an action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction after a case has been submitted to a jury
True, subject matter jursidiction is not waivable. The court must dismiss the action if there is no SMJ
40What is "amendment as of right" or "amendment as a matter of course"? When and how can it be made?
A party may amend their pleading once, within 21 days of filing without asking for permission. If 21 days have passed, the party needs to ask the defendant for permission to amend, and then the court if the defendant rejects the request to amend.
41What must a party do before filing a motion for sanctions?
Serve the motion to the offending party, so that they may have a chance to correct the offending conduct. The offending party will have 21 days to correct before the moving party files their motion.
42True or false: A court must hold a hearing when deciding whether to impose sanctions on a party
False, the court only has to give the adverse party notice and an "oppurtunity to be heard"
43True or false: A court may impose monetary sanctions on a party or its representative sua sponte
False, monetary sanctions may only be imposed in response to a Rule 11 motion, and may only be imposed on a party's representative, not the party themselves
44What are some factors a court may consider in chosing to deny a party's request to amend a pleading?
Whether the amendment would cause delay, suggests bad faith, or would unfairly prejudice another party
45What does the court consider in deciding whether to allow a party's claim to relate back after the SOL has passed?
Whether the claim relates to the same conduct, transaction, or occurence as the claim in the original complaint
46True or false: A motion for sanctions must be made separately from any other motion
True
47True or false: A party's failure to deny an allegation is treated as an admission
True
48When might a motion to strike be helpful in response to a party's answer?
When the answer provides a legally insufficient affirmative defense
49What does the court consider in deciding whether to allow a plaintiff to add a new defendant to the action after the SOL has passed?
Whether the plaintiff's failure to name the party was due to a mistake and whether the defendant had actual or constructive knowledge that they would be named if not but for the plaintiff's mistake
50True or false: A plaintiff's mere lack of knowledge of the correct party to be named in a suit permits relation back so that the correct party may be added
False, the plaintiff's failure to name the correct party must be due to a mistake, not simply a lack of knowledge
51True or false: Rulle 11 violations include asserting claims or defenses not supported by law as it exists, or arguably should exist
True
52True or false: The party itself who is being represented in court may have sanctions imposed upon them
True, but those sanctions cannot be monetary
53Recall the analysis for required parties
1) Can the court grant complete relief without the party?
2) Would the party's ability to protect its interest be impaired?
3) Would not joining the party risk the possibility of inconsistent obligations?
54Recall the analysis for indispensible parties (when requirec parties cannot be feasibly joined)
1) Would the nonparty, or any parties in the action, be prejudiced without the nonparty?
2) Is there an ability for the court to lessen any prejudice? (ex: through protective order)
3) Would judgment without the non-party be adequate?
4) Would there be any adequate remedy among the parties if the case were dismissed?
55Recall the sequence of a party joinder analysis
1) Is the nonparty a required party?
2) Is the non-party's joinder feasible?
3) Is the non-party indispensible?
56True or false: An action to set aside a lease or contract would make the parties to that contract indispensible
True
57True or false: If a case can proceed without the required party, then they're not indispensible to the action
True
58What does a plaintiff need to show in seeking to add a permissive counterclaim?
That the claim arises out of the same transaction or occurence
59What does a defendant need to show in seeking to add a permissive counterclaim
That the claim arises out of the same transaction or occurence, and that the claims share the same question of law/fact
60True or false: A crossclaim only needs to be related to the same transaction or occurence when there is no subject matter jurisdiction for that claim
True, because without meeting SMJ, they would need to use supplemental jurisdiction to add their claim (which requires same transaction/occurence)
61True or false: A permissive counterclaim only needs to be related to the same transaction or occurence when there is no subject matter jurisdiction for that claim
True, because without meeting SMJ, they would need to use supplemental jurisdiction to add their claim (which requires same transaction/occurence
62True or false: A court can't sever claims
False, courts may choose to sever claims that don't share the same transaction or occurence
63True or false: In the process of discovery, the parties are entitled only to material relevant to a claim or defense asserted in the action
True
64Define work-product
Anything prepared by an attorney in anticipation of litigation
65True or false: Mental impressions of an attorney are discoverable
False, mental impressions are given absolute privilege
66When may work product be discoverable?
If mental impressions can be redacted, and if the party has a substantial need for the information requested
67When may a protective order be used for the purpose of discovery?
When the order is meant to protect confidential information that the party itself should not have access to (such as trade secrets). In such cases, an attorney may request to show only the judge and the party's attorney the information requested
68True or false: Discovery documents must be produced in the format in which they are kept in the course of usual business
True, unless the party specifically intends to organize the documents according to the specific categories outlined in the request
69When must a responding party comply with a plaintiff's form of production request that may differ from how the information is kept in the course of usual business?
When it is not unduly burdensome
70When should a responding party comply with a plaintiff's form of production request to produce ESI in its native format?
When it is reasonably accessible and not unduly burdensome
71When may a producing party withhold ESI?
When it's not reasonably accessible
72True or false: Even if a form of production is specified, a responding party is not obligated to follow it
True, the party may object
73True or false: A party's failure to preserve information necessitates a court to rule on an adverse inference instruction against that party (presumption that the information was unfavorable)
False, there needs to be a showing of bad faith in the failure to preserve, such as an intent to deprive the requesting party of the information that was lost.
74True or false: A court may dismiss an action sua sponte when a party refuses to comply with a discovery order
True, but the refusal to comply must be wilful and must prejudice the requesting party