civ pro ii slideshow questions

Portia files a breach of contact against against Darla in 2020. Portia alleges breach occurred in 2014. Darla disputes Portia's claim, and prepared to offer proof she performed her duties under contract. Relevant statute of limitations is four years. Darla moves to dismiss Portia's complaint, attaching proof of performance. How should the court rule?
1. Grant Darla's motion on SOL grounds only.
2. Grant Darla's motion for failure to state a claim only.
3. Grant Darla's motion on both grounds.
4. Deny Darla's motion.

The law firm of Halston & Milk is moving to new offices across town. Office manager calls Move By Night Movers to handle the office move. They agree to do it for \$80,000 and give office manager a contract. But on the day scheduled for the move, they never show, explaining their truck has broken down. Office manager eventually has to find another mover on short notice, costing Halston & Milk \$160,000. Assume a federal district court would've jurisdiction. Which allegation doesn't need to be included in a complaint by Halston& Milk against Move By Night Movers?
1. H & M made a contract w/ movers.
2. Movers' truck broke down.
3. Movers failed to perform contract.
4. Therefore, Halston had to spend \$160,000 for alternate movers.

Professor Boles sues Bowen law, alleging emotional distress due to hours of videoconference faculty meetings. In Claim 1, Boles contends law school administration intentionally caused her emotional distress by expecting her to attend regularly-scheduled faculty meetings on Zoom. In Claim 2, Boles alleges law school was negligent in causing her emotional distress. Law school moves to dismiss Boles' complaint. How should court rule?
1. Grant motion, b/c Boles can't recover for negligence and an intentional tort.
2. Grant motion, b/c Boles has not met required heightened pleading standard for intentional torts.
3. Grant motion, b/c Boles isn't alleging illegal conduct.
4. Deny motion.

PL sues police department, alleging "officers entered my apartment w/out any right to do so and destroyed my favorite sofa while looking for drugs I supposedly kept in my home." PL also alleges "the officers have engaged in similar conduct in neighborhood many times before." Assume that, in order to win this claim, PL must prove not only officers engaged in this conduct, but department had a policy or custom led to officers' behavior. Police department moves to dismiss complaint, arguing complaint was inadequately pled. Should the motion be granted under Conley?
a. Yes, b/c complaint was not pled w/ particularity (it doesn't include particular details necessary to win case against department).
b. Yes. Although complaint doesn't need to be pled w/ particularity, PL has not explicitly alleged department had a policy or custom of engaging in this behavior.
c. No.

PL sues a home improvement contractor for fraud, alleging "the contractor engaged in various misrepresentations in connection w/ contractor's work on P's house." Contractor moves to dismiss complaint, arguing complaint is inadequately pled. Should motion be granted?
a. yes
b. no

Imagine your client was involved in a car accident. Which allegation survives Twombly/Iqbal pleading standard?
1. DF negligently caused accident.
2. DF failed to stop at stop sign and struck P's car as it lawfully entered intersection.

What if PL doesn't give proper notice, but DF has actual notice. In other words, DF knows of lawsuit and shows up to argue notice was insufficient. Should actual notice suffice?
1. Yes
2. No

What papers must be served on DF to commence a litigation?
1. Complaint
2. Summons
3. Summons and Complaint
4. Summons, Complaint and any discovery material supporting allegations

Which of the following doesn't need to be included on summons?
1. Name/address of person effectuating service
2. Court
3. Date and time DF must appear
4. Court seal and clerk's signature

Where do you get summons?
1. Lawyer's Office
2. Lexis/Westlaw
3. Court Clerk's Office
4. Any legal documents website (e.g. www.legalzoom.com)
5. Any of the above

Which methods of service are allowable for an individual DF?
1. Personal delivery
2. Leaving a copy at residence w/ "someone of suitable age and discretion who resides there"
3. Delivering to authorized agent or legal recipient
4. Using a method authorized by state law (e.g. certified mail)
5. All of the above

In addition to Rule(e) methods, what additional method is allowable to serve a corporate DF?
1. Newspaper publication
2. Electronic delivery (e.g. facsimile or electronic mail)
3. Delivering to managing agent, lawful authorized agent, or statutory agent
4. Personal service

You've completed service on DF. Now what?
1. File waiver of service under Rule 4(d)
2. File proof of service under Rule 4(l)
3. Sit back, relax, and have tasty beverage
4. All of the above

Assume Hunter asserted a new claim in Amended Complaint filed on July 8, 2008. Does omnibus motion rule in FRCP 12(g)(2) preclude Offshore from moving to dismiss new claim under FRCP 12(b)(6) (failure to state a claim)?
1. Yes
2. No

Assume Hunter asserted a new claim in Amended Complaint filed on July 8, 2008. May Offshore add its motion to dismiss for lack of PJ to its motion to dismiss new claim under FRCP 12(b)(6)?
1. Yes
2. No

Would it be better to just answer complaint, then file a motion to dismiss later, once things have settled a bit and discovery has started?
1. Yes, as long as there was no preanswer 12(b) motion.
2. Yes, as long as you can show good cause for waiting to file a motion to dismiss.
3. No

Suppose you have been served w/ frivolous complaint, how do you obtain sanctions?
1. File a motion for sanctions under Rule 11 and serve on offending party.
2. Serve a motion for sanctions under Rule 11. Don't file motion for 21 days.
3. Contact opposing counsel outlining why you believe complaint is frivolous. If counsel refuses to withdraw complaint w/in 21 days, file a motion for sanctions under Rule 11.
4. Request court issue order to show cause why offending party shouldn't be sanctioned.
5. Any of the above.

The purpose of Rule 11 sanctions is ____________.
1. Compensation
2. Deterrence
3. Education
4. Punishment

Suppose during oral argument in front of trial judge, PL's counsel starts screaming at DF's lawyer, calling him a "big jerk" and other colorful labels, or lies about facts in case. Are Rule 11 sanctions proper?
1. Yes
2. No

Assume Rule 11(b)(2) was violated. Who may be sanctioned?
1. Lawyer
2. Client
3. Both Lawyer and Client
4. Neither

Rule 15 gives you absolute right to amend your pleading before trial.
1.True
2.False

What's the deadline for amending a pleading under FRCP 15(a)(1)?
1. 21 days after service
2. 21 days after service of a responsive pleading
3. 21 days after service of a Rule 12(b), (e) or (f) motion
4. All of the above

After deadlines specified in FRCP 15(a)(1)(A) and (B) pass, no pleading amendments are allowed.
1. True
2. False

Fill in blank: The FRCP _______ the granting of permission to amend pleadings by courts before trial.
1. encourage
2. discourage

PL (an athlete) sues DF for libel, alleging DF lied about P's use of anabolic steroid use to potential sponsors, causing PL to lose sponsorship deals. 40 days later, DF moves to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), arguing complaint fails to allege DF published any written statements about P's anabolic steroid use. (A written statement is a necessary element of libel.) 5 days later, PL files an amended complaint, which alleges DF published libelous comments on D's blog. DF moves to dismiss complaint, arguing it fails to comply w/ Rule 15. The court should:
1. Allow amended complaint, b/c it was filed as a matter of right.
2. Dismiss complaint, b/c PL needed to get court's permission before filing.
3. Dismiss complaint, b/c original allegations plausibly support an inference of publication, so an amendment was unnecessary.
4. Allow amended complaint, b/c there was no undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive.

Same case as prior slide, except after several months of discovery, DF moves for summary judgment, arguing there's no evidence DF published any written statements about P's anabolic steroid use. (A written statement is a necessary element of libel.) 5 days later, and w/in applicable statute of limitations, PL makes a motion to file an amended complaint alleging a new cause of action for defamation (which has no "writing" requirement). DF opposes PL's motion. The court should:
1. Allow amended complaint, b/c it can be filed as a matter of right.
2. Allow amended complaint, b/c there is no undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive.
3. Deny leave to file, b/c of undue delay.
4. Deny leave to file, b/c it prejudices D's motion for summary judgment.

Fill in blank: The FRCP _______ the granting of permission to amend pleadings by courts during trial.
1. encourage
2. discourage

Palmer and Domino are involved in a car accident. Palmer sues Domino, alleging Domino was driving negligently. Palmer alleges Domino's negligence was due to Domino being distracted w/ his radio. After discovery and after statute of limitations expires, Palmer learns Domino was distracted by texting. Palmer moves to amend complaint to change theory of negligence to reflect a "texting while driving" theory. Should court allow amendment?
1. Yes, b/c there is no undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive.
2. Yes, b/c Domino's allegations arise out of same facts as original complaint.
3. No, b/c amendment would be futile.
4. No, b/c Domino would be prejudiced by amendment.

PL sues DF, alleging DF breached a contract by failing to provide PL w/
the number of widgets contract specified. After all relevant statutes of limitations expire, PL moves to amend complaint in order to allege widgets that were provided weren't manufactured according to terms of contract and couldn't be used for their intended purpose. Should court grant motion to amend?
1. Yes
2. No

A sues B in federal district court. Claim 1 is for breach of a 2016 contract. Claim 2 is for negligence and alleges B hit A in a car accident in 2015. Assuming federal court would've subject matter jurisdiction over both claims (i.e., diversity jurisdiction exists and claims exceed 75k), can A allege both causes of action in same case?
1. Yes
2. Yes, if court finds both claims arise from same transaction or occurrence.
3. No, b/c aggregation of claims is improper.
4. No, b/c trial of issues together would confuse jury.

Wong sues Cardell for libel on one occasion, trespass to land on a different date, and an unrelated breach of contract. She seeks damages for libel, an injunction on trespass claim, and damages and specific performance on contract claim. Assuming subject matter jurisdiction is proper, are all claims properly joined?
1. Yes
2. No

Yee sues Reputable Roofing Co. for negligently damaging siding on her house while reroofing it, but believes Reputable breached its contract by using inadequate shingles on project. Does Rule 18(a) require her to assert her second claim for breach of contract along w/ negligence claim?
1. Yes
2. No

During a construction project, a worker dies as a result of negligence by company A, the general contractor at site. At same time, owner of property is concerned company A has breached its contract w/ owner by charging owner more than contract specified. Can worker's estate and owner of property sue company A together in same case in federal court, assuming there is subject matter and PJ over all claims?
a. Yes
b. No

DF signed a non-compete agreement w/ her employer, E. E sues DF to enforce agreement when DF goes to work for a company in same industry. DF2 signed identically worded agreement w/ her employer, E2. Issue in both cases is whether agreements are enforceable under state law. Assuming there's subject matter and PJ over all claims, can E1 and E2 sue DF1 and DF2 in same case?
a. Yes
b. No

A and B sue C and D in federal district court. A and B allege C and D engaged in an unlawful conspiracy against A and B contrary to federal antitrust law by preventing A and B from selling their fruits and vegetables at a local market. Assuming federal court would've subject matter jurisdiction over both claims, can A and B sue both C and D in same case?
a. Yes
b. No

Suppose Yee sues Protect and Garza, and Protect claims accident was caused by Garza's negligence. Protect sues Garza, claiming Garza should indemnify Protect, since his negligence caused the accident. Is Protect asserting a proper crossclaim?
1.Yes
2.No

Suppose Yee sues Protect and Garza, and Protect claims accident was caused by Garza's negligence. Protect sues Garza, claiming Garza's negligence caused damage to Protect's truck on another job. Is Protect asserting a proper crossclaim?
1.Yes
2.No

Now assume Protect asserts two claims against Garza. Claim 1 is for indemnification (alleging accident at Yee's house was caused by Garza's negligence); Claim 2 is for damage to Protect's equipment Garza caused on another job. May Protect assert both claims?
1.Yes
2.No

Yee has sued Protect and Garza regarding accident. Protect asserts two claims against Garza: Claim 1 is for indemnification (alleging accident at Yee's house was caused by Garza's negligence) and Claim 2 is for damage to Protect's equipment Garza caused on another job. Next, Garza brings a claim against Protect for failing to pay him overtime for three months. What's Garza's claim?
1. Claim
2. Compulsory counterclaim
3. Permissive counterclaim
4. Crossclaim

Owner insures its ship during w/ two insurers. Insurer #1 insures against loss due to hostilities; Insurer #2 due to loss from any other cause. Ship is lost in mysterious circumstances, and Owner sues Insurer #1, who insured against loss due to hostilities. Insurer #1 impleads Insurer #2, arguing ship was lost due to other causes. Is impleader proper?
1.Yes
2.No

Chung sues Ace Power Tool Company for an injury allegedly caused by a defectively designed saw manufactured by Ace. Noriega seeks permissive intervention to recover for an injury he suffered at a different time and place using same model. May the court allow permissive intervention?
1. Yes
2. No

Crowley (CO) sues Picard (IA) for \$200,000, claiming Picard, the broker in a real estate sale, misrepresented septic problems w/ property, inducing Crowley to buy it. Picard impleads Banchevsky, the seller, for indemnification, arguing if she misrepresented septic problems to Crowley, it was b/c Banchevsky had given her wrong information about them. Banchevsky is from Colorado. Does the court have jurisdiction over Picard's claim against Banchevsky?
1. Yes, b/c impleader claim is proper and court can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Picard's claim against Banchevsky.
2. Yes, b/c impleader claim is proper.
3. No, b/c joining claim against Banchevsky violates §1367(b).
4. No, b/c impleader claim is improper.

Crowley (CO) sues Picard (IA) for \$200,000, claiming Picard, the broker in a real estate sale, misrepresented septic problems w/ the property, inducing Crowley to buy it. Picard impleads Banchevsky, the seller, for indemnification, arguing if she misrepresented septic problems to Crowley, it was b/c Banchevsky had given her wrong information about them. Banchevsky is from Iowa. Does court have jurisdiction over Picard's claim against Banchevsky?
1. Yes, b/c impleader claim is proper and court can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Picard's claim against Banchevsky.
2. Yes, b/c impleader is proper.
3. No, b/c joining claim against Banchevsky violates §1367(b).
4. No, b/c impleader claim is improper.

Crowley (CO) sues Picard (IA) for \$200,000, claiming Picard, the broker in a real estate sale, misrepresented septic problems w/ property, inducing Crowley to buy it. Picard impleads Banchevsky, the seller, for indemnification, arguing if she misrepresented septic problems to Crowley, it was b/c Banchevsky had given her wrong information about them. Assume Banchevsky is from Iowa. Crowley, PL, asserts a claim directly against Banchevsky, third-party DF, for misrepresentation, claiming same damages, after Banchevsky is brought in by Picard. This is authorized by Fed. R. Civ. P. 14(a)(3). Does court have jurisdiction over Crowley's 14(a)(3) claim against Banchevsky?
1. Yes, b/c 14(a)(3) claim is proper and court can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Crowley's claim against Banchevsky.
2. Yes, b/c 14(a)(3) claim is proper.
3. No, b/c joining claim against Banchevsky violates §1367(b).
4. No, b/c 14(a)(3) claim is improper.

Crowley (CO) sues Picard (IA) for \$200,000, claiming Picard, the broker in a real estate sale, misrepresented septic problems w/ property, inducing Crowley to buy it. Picard impleads Banchevsky, the seller, for indemnification, arguing if she misrepresented septic problems to Crowley, it was b/c Banchevsky had given her wrong information about them. Assume Banchevsky is from Colorado. Crowley, PL, asserts a claim directly against Banchevsky, third-party DF, for misrepresentation, claiming same damages, after Banchevsky is brought in by Picard. This is authorized by Fed. R. Civ. P. 14(a)(3). Does the court have jurisdiction over Crowley's 14(a)(3) claim against Banchevsky?
1. Yes, b/c 14(a)(3) claim is proper and court can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Crowley's claim against Banchevsky.
2. Yes, b/c 14(a)(3) claim is proper.
3. No, b/c joining claim against Banchevsky violates §1367(b).
4. No, b/c 14(a)(3) claim is improper

Crowley (CO) sues Picard (IA) for \$200,000, claiming Picard, the broker in a real estate sale, misrepresented septic problems w/ property, inducing Crowley to buy it. Picard impleads Banchevsky, the seller, for indemnification, arguing if she misrepresented septic problems to Crowley, it was b/c Banchevsky had given her wrong information about them. Banchevsky is from Colorado. Crowley asserts a claim directly against Banchevsky (from Colorado) after she is brought in by Picard. Crowley claims Banchevsky violated Federal Truth-in-Real-Estate-Sales Act when she deliberately misrepresented septic conditions on property. Does the court have jurisdiction over Crowley's 14(a)(3) claim against Banchevsky?
1. Yes, b/c 14(a)(3) claim is proper, and court can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Crowley's claim against Banchevsky.
2. Yes, b/c 14(a)(3) claim is proper.
3. No, b/c joining claim against Banchevsky
4. No, b/c 14(a)(3) claim is improper.

Crowley (CO) sues Picard (IA) for \$200,000, claiming Picard, the broker in a real estate sale, misrepresented septic problems w/ property, inducing Crowley to buy it. Picard impleads Banchevsky, the seller, for indemnification, arguing if she misrepresented septic problems to Crowley, it was b/c Banchevsky had given her wrong information about them. Banchevsky is from Colorado. Banchevsky, after being brought in as a third-party DF by Picard, asserts a claim for \$25,000 against Picard (the original DF) under Rule 14(a)(2)(B), for balance of purchase price for property, which Picard had collected but not paid over to Banchevsky. Assume Banchevsky is from Colorado. Does court have jurisdiction over Banchevsky's claim against Picard?
1. Yes, b/c court can exercise supplemental jurisdiction and claim is properly joined.
2. Yes, b/c claim is properly joined.
3. No, b/c court can't exercise supplemental jurisdiction.
4. No, b/c claim is improperly joined.

Crowley (CO) sues Picard (IA) for \$200,000, claiming Picard, the broker in a real estate sale, misrepresented septic problems w/ property, inducing Crowley to buy it. Picard impleads Banchevsky, the seller, for indemnification, arguing if she misrepresented septic problems to Crowley, it was b/c Banchevsky had given her wrong information about them. Banchevsky is from Colorado. Banchevsky counterclaims against Picard, claiming Picard did not pay her \$60,000 she collected on sale of another property Picard sold for Banchevsky. Does the court have jurisdiction over Banchevsky's claim against Picard?
1. Yes, b/c court can exercise supplemental jurisdiction and claim is properly joined.
2. Yes, b/c claim is properly joined.
3. No, b/c court can't exercise supplemental jurisdiction.
4. No, b/c claim is improperly joined.

Discovery material must be both "relevant" and "admissible" as defined in FRCP 26(b)(1).
1. True
2. False

A court may limit a party's access to, or use of, discovery material even if it satisfies requirements of Rule 26(b)(1).
1. True
2. False

Lawyer Larry is a business partner w/ David in a hedge fund. After fund loses a lot of money, a disappointed investor sues fund for mismanagement and seeks discovery of various documents. Is following shielded from discovery? An email between Larry and David discussing hedge fund's declining financial prospects and Larry's ideas about better investments. Email is labeled "PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL."
1. Attorney-Client Privilege
2. Attorney Work Product
3. Both
4. Neither

Lawyer Larry is a business partner w/ David in a hedge fund. After fund loses a lot of money, a disappointed investor sues fund for mismanagement and seeks discovery of various documents. Is following shielded from discovery? After being sued, Larry and David retain Lawrence as outside counsel. At Lawrence's request, David prepares a chronology of events leading up to lawsuit. David would not have prepared chronology in normal course of business absent lawyer's request. Investor seeks production of chronology.
1. Attorney-Client Privilege
2. Attorney Work Product
3. Both
4. Neither

Lawyer Larry is a business partner w/ David in a hedge fund. After fund loses a lot of money, a disappointed investor sues fund for mismanagement and seeks discovery of various documents. Is following shielded from discovery? After being sued, Larry and David retain Lawrence as outside counsel. After meeting w/ two partners and reviewing some initial documents, Lawrence sends partners a letter outlining major legal issues in litigation and suggestions on how to proceed. Letter also highlights facts Lawrence believes are both helpful and damaging to case. Investor seeks production of letter.
1. Attorney-Client Privilege
2. Attorney Work Product
3. Both
4. Neither

Your client, Toyota Car Company, has been sued by Peter Painter. Painter alleges he was injured b/c of a design defect in his Toyota Camry sedan. Suppose Toyota finds a document shows it had clear knowledge of design defect and decided not to fix it b/c of cost? Must it disclose this document under Rule 26(a)?
1. Yes
2. No

Before filing action, Painter had little opportunity to do any informal discovery beyond a minimal (but reasonable), inquiry. Only information Painter produces as initial disclosures are doctor's bills and accident report. After exchanging initial disclosures, Painter learns of two eye-witnesses and gets copy of repair estimate suggesting brake failure. Must Painter produce this additional information?
1. Yes
2.No

To depose a witness who is also a party, deposing party's attorney serves _________ on opposing counsel.
1. Subpoena designating witness and information about deposition
2. Subpoena designating witness and information about deposition and a demand for production of documents
3. Deposition notice designating witness and information about deposition

if deponent's attorney objects to question posed, witness doesn't have to answer.
1. True
2. False

Rule 30 places a limit of ___ depositions on each party. Each deposition may not last longer than _________.
1. 20 depositions/ 7 hours
2. 10 depositions/ 7 hours
3. 20 depositions/ a "reasonable" length of time
4. 10 depositions/ a "reasonable" length of time

The Erie doctrine is most relevant when analyzing which jurisdiction question?
1. Removal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1441
2. Venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1404 or 28 U.S.C § 1406
3. Federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331
4. Diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332

After Erie, "laws of several states" language in RDA means:
1. Rules and statutes passed by legislature, as well as local customs
2. Rules and statutes passed by legislature, local customs, and state court rules of decision.
3. Rules and statutes passed by legislature, local customs, state court rules of decision, and state court rules of procedure.