Acing Civil Procedure
Author:
Spencer, A. Benjamin
Edition:
4th
Copyright Date:
2014
16 chapters
have results for civil procedure
Conclusion: General Examination Tips 3 results
- I truly hope the above material will be helpful to you as you go through your civil procedure course and examination. Acing civil procedure is not difficult with the right amount of study and preparation; these checklists should help you clearly organize procedural doctrines in a way that will make them manageable and facilitate your application of the doctrines to particular fact patterns. Good luck!
- ow that you have the full set of checklists for each of the topics that you will be grappling with on your examination, there are some final bits of advice to help you ace your civil procedure examination:
- It’s over! Don’t waste time talking with other classmates about the exam. You’ll just create more anxiety for yourself. Focus on the next exam; or, if civil procedure is your last exam, celebrate being done!
- Open Chapter
Chapter 5. The Erie Doctrine 9 results (showing 5 best matches)
- This question is inspired by one in JOSEPH W. GLANNON, THE GLANNON GUIDE TO CIVIL PROCEDURE: LEARNING CIVIL PROCEDURE THROUGH MULTIPLE-CHOICE QUESTIONS AND ANALYSIS 199–200 (2003).
- Civil Procedure or federal statute as opposed to an uncodified federal practice.
- that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 3 did not apply to the question of when a statute of limitations period was tolled.
- line of cases was not applicable to the situation when there is a valid and applicable Federal Rule of Civil Procedure involved. Under such circumstances, said the Court, if the Federal Rule is directly applicable to the issue at hand, and if the rule is valid under the Rules Enabling Act
- analysis—applies to situations where a contrary Federal Rule of Civil Procedure or federal statute applies to the issue at hand and proceeds with an analysis under the Rules Enabling Act and/or the U.S. Constitution. The other strain—an
- Open Chapter
Chapter 8. Discovery 2 results
- Federal civil discovery is governed by Rules 26 through 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule 45, governing subpoenas, is relevant as well). The content of these rules could by itself occupy an entire course or textbook. Thus, here we will focus on those aspects of these rules typically covered in the basic first-year civil procedure course: the general scope of discovery, the workings of the six discovery mechanisms, and the nature of material that is protected from disclosure.
- iscovery is the process whereby parties to an action are able to obtain information from their adversaries regarding the various issues presented in the dispute. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as adopted in 1938 provided for very broad discovery, something that was generally not the case prior to adoption of the Rules. Although several amendments to the discovery rules have restricted discovery in various ways, discovery under the Federal Rules remains fairly broad in its scope.
- Open Chapter
Preface 1 result
- This book was written to help the large number of students who emerge every year from their civil procedure courses dazed and confused. Civil procedure for many is the most confounding of subjects, dealing with technical arcana that beginning law students have a difficult time getting their minds around. Civil procedure does not have to be so difficult and indeed can be quite interesting to study. After teaching my own students the topic, I learned early on that they would benefit greatly from a useful organizing tool that brought all of the material for each subject together, not only in a way that would facilitate understanding, but also in a way that could be used to solve the problems they would face in working through classroom hypotheticals or examination questions. So I began developing checklists for their benefit that I presented to my students at the end of each unit. I found the students not only to be extremely grateful for this information, but it was universally...
- Open Chapter
Chapter 6. Pleadings 7 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The pleadings material, as presented in most first-year civil procedure courses, focuses on the requirements for drafting pleadings, the circumstances under which the pleadings may be amended, and the rules for ensuring that allegations made in the pleadings are truthful. This chapter will address each of these matters in turn.
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (“Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) requires only ‘a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,’ in order to ‘give the defendant fair notice of what the … claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.’ ” (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957))).
- Jurisdictional allegations in complaints need only minimally allege the basis for invoking the subject matter jurisdiction of a federal court. For diversity cases, so long as the complaint indicates complete diversity of citizenship among the parties and asserts satisfaction of the jurisdictional amount-in-controversy requirement, the requirement to plead jurisdiction is satisfied. For federal question cases, simply alleging that the case arises under a particular federal statute, the Constitution, or a treaty will suffice. Form 7 in the Appendix to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides guidance for meeting this pleading obligation.
- In 2013 the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules proposed abolishing the Official Forms. This change, if approved, would take effect December 1, 2015.
- This is currently 120 days. In 2013 the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules proposed reducing this period to 60 days. This change, if approved, would take effect December 1, 2015.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 7. Joinder of Claims and Parties 3 results
- . P. 13(a)(1)(B). This facet of the compulsory counterclaim rule is typically not discussed or tested in the basic first-year civil procedure course.
- As noted at the outset of this chapter, class actions—a complex litigation topic not covered in all civil procedure courses—will not be discussed.
- Courts have not consistently applied the logical relationship test in a way that provides clear guidance for students of civil procedure.
- Open Chapter
Half Title 1 result
Title Page 1 result
- he Federal Rules provide for preliminary disposition of cases without trial through several procedural mechanisms. The devices typically covered in the basic first-year civil procedure course are those housed within Rule 12—often referred to as pre-answer motions—and the motion for summary judgment, which is governed by Rule 56. This chapter will focus on the standards and analyses applicable to these motions.
- The applicable standard of proof is a matter of substantive law connected with the underlying claim; typically, however, the standard is proof by a preponderance of the evidence in civil cases.
- • If the party bearing the burden of proof at trial identifies factual information that can be reduced to admissible evidence that supports its claim—as opposed to mere opinions, unsupported allegations, or uncorroborated, self-interested testimony—then summary judgment against that party should probably be denied, assuming that the evidence supports the claim to the extent required by the applicable standard of proof at trial (typically a preponderance of the evidence in civil cases).
- , 10 AM. J. TRIAL ADVOC. 433, 468 (1987) (“By reading backwards from the directed verdict the Court transformed summary procedure into a full trial-before-trial.”).
- Open Chapter
- The motion for judgment as a matter of law as provided for in Rule 50 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is the federal equivalent of the traditional directed verdict motion and motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or j.n.o.v.
- Amendment does not preclude use of the directed verdict to prevent a jury from deciding a case primarily because at the time of the adoption of the amendment in 1791 there were other procedures—namely the demurrer and the new trial order—that avoided the verdict of a jury.
- Open Chapter
Introduction 3 results
- Unfortunately, my outlines never were able to provide me with anything more than a restatement of various principles of law or doctrine organized by topic; it remained for me to take those doctrines and apply them to the fact patterns presented in my exams. That process of applying legal principles to facts is a large part of what law school, law school exams, and lawyering are all about; knowing the relevant law is only half (oftentimes less than half) of the battle. So why were I and my fellow students devoting all of this time and energy into developing these miniature tomes on the law of Contracts, Torts, Civil Procedure, etc., and not putting more energy into developing a tool that could help guide our legal analysis of problems presented on exams?
- This book is not a hornbook and does not attempt to explain civil procedure doctrines in any great detail; rather, it merely seeks to organize doctrine into a dynamic tool that students can use to apply legal principles to fact patterns they will face on exams. Thus, students should use these checklists in conjunction with other substantive material in order best to prepare for their exams. That being said, use of these checklists should enhance the ability of the student to write reasoned and sound responses to examination questions. Further, these checklists should be helpful in putting the course material in perspective and providing a clearer picture of
- The purpose of this book is to present law students with a comprehensive set of checklists pertaining to each of the topics typically covered in first-year federal civil procedure courses. The checklists are meant to provide students with a tool that facilitates their analysis of procedural problems. Each chapter will focus on a different topic, first presenting a brief review of the subject followed by the checklist for the subject. After the checklist has been presented, hypothetical problems will be analyzed to illustrate how the checklists can be used to resolve such problems. Each chapter will conclude with a section entitled “Points to Remember” to recapitulate key points that students need to remember when answering exam questions. A concluding chapter provides some final thoughts on preparing for and taking exams generally. At the end of the book there is an Appendix that presents condensed one- or two-page “mini-checklists” for each topic. Students may find these useful...
- Open Chapter
Chapter 2. Notice and the Opportunity to Be Heard 7 results (showing 5 best matches)
- ) for determining the validity of pre-deprivation procedures in Second, courts are to examine the risk of erroneous deprivation through the procedures under attack and the probable value of additional safeguards. These risks can be mitigated by procedures that require the plaintiff to make some showing of entitlement, that require that the plaintiff post a bond, or that involve a judge in making the determination, but such procedures need not be adversarial in nature.
- The city invoked this procedure with respect to Leonard’s 1955 Plymouth. Leonard had parked the car lawfully on the street in front of his house but was traveling abroad for a three-month extended vacation. On his return he learned that his car had been impounded and destroyed. He sued to recover damages, arguing that the city’s deprivation procedure was constitutionally infirm for failing to provide him with a reasonable opportunity to be heard. How should the court rule on Leonard’s constitutional challenge?
- The issue here is whether the city’s deprivation procedure is defective for failing to provide an adequate hearing. Under a three-pronged test is used to determine the adequacy of pre-deprivation procedures. First, the nature of the property interest at stake is evaluated. Here, the property interest is Leonard’s car. Presumably, this car is his primary means of transportation and is likely important in enabling Leonard to travel to work or to shop for necessities, although the facts do not disclose this information. In any event, it can be assumed that one’s interest in his or her vehicle is a sufficiently important interest such that it should not be violated absent adequate measures designed to protect the owner against a wrongful deprivation.
- Given these deficiencies in the city’s junk vehicle removal procedures, I would argue that Leonard’s constitutional argument is correct.
- • The Due Process Clause does not require pre-deprivation hearings nor does it require that deprivation decisions be reviewed by a judge. Rather, the standard is a fact-dependent one that principally considers the protections against erroneous deprivation and the interests at stake. Thus, procedures that are adequate in one context may be inadequate in another.
- Open Chapter
About the Author 1 result
- . After law school, Professor Spencer served a one-year clerkship with Judge Judith W. Rogers of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Before becoming a law professor, Professor Spencer worked as a Litigation Associate in a New York-based law firm for two years. A member of the American Law Institute and the West Publishing Company Law School Advisory Board, Professor Spencer teaches and publishes in the area of civil procedure.
- Open Chapter
Appendix: Mini-Checklists 1 result
Chapter 3. Subject Matter Jurisdiction 4 results
- Ann, this claim is based on federal law because it is alleging a violation of federal civil rights law. As such, Oz’s claim against Ann qualifies for federal question jurisdiction.
- Remands of cases removed based on §§ 1332(d) (CAFA cases), 1442 (federal officer cases), and 1443 (civil rights actions) are reviewable. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1447(d), 1453(c)(1).
- Oz, a citizen of Ohio, sued Ann, his employer and also a citizen of Ohio, in federal court alleging that Ann violated federal civil rights statutes by permitting her subordinates to engage in sexual harassment of Oz. Oz joins (under Rule 20) Liz as a defendant, a co-worker and citizen of Ohio, who actually engaged in the harassment. Because Liz is not Oz’s employer, state tort law is the basis of Oz’s claim against Liz. Oz seeks $75,001 in damages against Liz. Does the federal court have subject matter jurisdiction over Oz’s claims against Ann and Liz?
- CAFA refers to the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, which provides for jurisdiction over certain kinds of class actions if there is minimal diversity. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d) (“The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action in which the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is a class action in which any member of a class of plaintiffs is a citizen of a State different from any defendant….”).
- Open Chapter
Chapter 4. Venue 2 results
- —residents in districts where they are subject to personal jurisdiction with respect to the civil action in question (not just those states where they are incorporated or have a headquarters as is the case for their citizenship under the diversity statute). For multi-district states, corporations are residents only in those districts where they would be subject to personal jurisdiction were the district treated like a separate state.
- jurisdiction with respect to the civil action in question.
- Open Chapter
- Publication Date: May 19th, 2014
- ISBN: 9781628100419
- Subject: Civil Procedure
- Series: Acing Series
- Type: Exam Prep
- Description: Moving beyond the outline format used by most students, this book uses a checklist format to lead students through the questions they need to ask and answer to fully analyze the legal questions they are trying to resolve. It assembles the different issues, presenting a clear guide to procedural analysis that students can draw upon when writing their exams. Other study aids provide sample problems, but this book offers a systematic approach to problem solving.