Civ Pro Test Outline
		Civil Procedure:  Cases and Materials 6th Edition
	John C. Cound, Jack H. Friedenthal, Arthur R. Miller, John E. Sexton

Rush v. City of Maple Heights
      Res Judicata--final & binding dec.
      Issue of Preclusion
      Claim of Preclusion
    Stare Decis 4 lower cts
      Leg. v. Jud
        1) Leg.
            1. Det. the jxn. of cts
            2. Can overrule any C/L
        2) Jud.
            1. Follow statutes as long as Const.
            2. Dec. Const.
            3. Defer D in C/L 2 leg. usually
Pennoyer v. Neff
      Terr. sov. of state & ct.
      In Personam Jxn--FF&CC, Res Judicata, Preclusions (issue & claim)
      In Rem--No Res Judicata, & Preclusions (issue & claim)
      Quasi In Rem--No Res Judicata
      Dir. Appeal
      Collateral Appeal
Grace v. MacArthur
      P. 74 Nt 4
      Served notice in plane which is valid b/c terr. land up
Milliken v. Meyer
      P. 73 Nt 5
      Cant take irreconciliable difs collaterally
      Persons Home is basis 4 jxn
Gen Jxn
      Domicile (Milliken v. Meyer)
      Presence (Grace v. MacArthur)
      Sys & Cont. (Int. Shoe)
Specif. Jxn
      Specif. issue like car (Hess) / tax (Int. Shoe)
Hess v. Pawloski
      Specif. Jxn
      Spec. Appearance
      Appeal both jxn & merit
      Implied consent 2 reach jxn 2 non-residents (agent 4 serv. w/in state)
      Statutory construction issue--Statute giving rise 2 C/A
      PA statute giving jxn over auto accident
Int. Shoe Co. v. Wash.
      Statutory construction issue--statute giving rise 2 C/A
      Const. Issue--due process
      Jud. Jxn
        1. Jxn 2 adjudicate
        2. Rendering binding dec
      Leg. Jxn
         Subst. law jxn
      L-A Statute--only need 14th amend. arg. 2 go as far as Const. permits
      Min Contact
        1.  Trad. notions of fair play & subst. justice
        2.  Rsblness 2 subj. D & notice
        3.  Basis 4 specif. jxn but eventually 4 gen
        4.  Purposefully comes in contact w/the state
      Facts
        1. Salesmen resided in Wash.
        2. Their activities in state where commissioned
        3. Supplied them w/line of samples 2 display 2 purchasers
        4. Rented perm sample rooms
        5. Merchandise shipped into Wash.
        6. Systematic solicitation of orders
McGee v. International Life Insurance Co.
      Statute 4 C/A
      No need 4 serving in state
      Rsbl stand. b/c subst. dealing in state CA although just 1 busi.
      Purposeful Availment
      Options of D
        1. Default
        2. Spec. Appearance--preserve jxn pt in dir. appeal
      Facts of Contacts
        1.  One policy w/McGee in CA
        2.  K delivered in CA, premiums mailed there
        3.  Resident of CA
        4.  CAs int.
Hanson v. Denckla
      Collateral Attack
      NO prop., min. contact, / purposeful availment so no jxn by FL
      Limit the reach of states
      Facts
        1. Trust in DL
        2. Moved 2 FL
        3. Ded beneficiaries in FL
        4. DL Co. not present in FL
World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson
      No jxn. b/c no purposeful availment, no min. contact
        1. Fair play & subst. justice 2 D
        2. Terr.
      Manufacturers should anticipate but Distributors dont 4 prod. liability
      Specif. Jxn
        1.  Arise out of the contacts 2 purposefully avail or related 2 the 
            contacts / axns
        2.  Axns/contacts R dired @ the forum state
      Brennans Dissent that look @ all parties, choice of law relev.
      Unilateral activity by P isnt enough 2 find jxn over D
      Facts
        1. Bought in NY
        2. Accident in OK
        3. No contacts of sales, servs,advertise, /purposefully avail 
           themselves 2 the law
Keeton Case
      Statute gave rise 2 C/A
      Multi-state jxn b/c arise out of more than 1 state
      Potential of Specif. Jxn.
      Hussler & megazines
Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz
      Fed. Ct. proceedings
      Choice of law provision which is dif. from selection of forum
      Purposefully Avil 2 the law b/c contractually agree 2 the law of FL
      Sliding Scale of Brennan
        1. Purposeful availment & Min. Contact v. Fairness,
Subst. Justice,
        Rsblness
        2. If really fair, not need as much of purposeful availment & 
           min. contact
        3. If really unfair, doesnt matter if lots of min.  contact ested
      5 factors of fairness
        1.  The burden on the D
        2.  Forum states int. in adjudicating the dispute
        3.  Ps int. in obtaining convenient & effective relief
        4.  Interstate jud. syss int. in efficient resolution of controversies
        5.  Shared int. of the several states in furthering fund.
subst. soc. policies
     Burdens of Proof
        1.  P has burden 2 prove jxn & contact
        2.  D has burden 2 prove a compelling case of unfairness
      Accomodation of unfairness by D of venue
      Facts
        1. BK in FL while franchisee in Mich.
        2. Choice of law, benefit, K of subst cnxn w/FL, reached deliberately
        beyond Mich., negotiations, vol. acceptance, mail & telephone
Asahi Metal Ind Co. v. Superior Ct.
      Stream of Commerce
        1. Manufacturer & Importer put the prod dirly into stream of commerce
        2. Five justices said its enough & should anticipate b/c purposeful
           availment
        3. Four justices said need more
      Additional activities D dired purposefully @ the forum state 2 stream of
      commerce 2 est. jxn
        1.  Designing the prod. 4 the mkt in the forum state
        2.  Advertising in the forum state
        3.  Esting channels 4 providing regular advice 2 customers in the 
            forum state
        4.  Mkting the prod. through a distributor who has agreed 2 serve as 
            the sale agent in the forum state
      Brennans Sliding Scale
        1.  Compelling case of unfairness
        2.  Foreign element
      Consistency in indemnification
      Facts
        1. Asahi manufactures 2 Cheng Shin
        2. Aware that valve sold 2 Cheng Shin will B sold 2 US
Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.
      Gen. Jxn--unrel. 2 cause of axn / not arising out of that state
        1. Pres maintained an office on behalf of the Co.
        2. Office files maintained
        3. Correspondence reling 2 the busi. of the Co.
        4. Drew & distributed salary checks
        5. Used banks in OH 4 balancing Co. funds
        6. Meetings held @ home
        7. Supervised policies of the Co.
      Cont. & Sys
Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia v. Hall
      Gen. Jxn not enough
      Foreign element
      4 pts failing gen jxn
        1. No place of busi. in TX
        2. One trip by chief executive officer 2 Houston
        3. Acceptance from Consorcio/WSH of checks drawn on a TX bank
        4. Purchases & the reled training trips of helicopter
Jxn over Prop.
      No limited appearance
      In personam immly upon enter
      Issue preclusion
      Prop incls movables like horses & debtors
Harris v. Balk
      Respect FF&CC so debtors can B seized
Ontario & Vermont
      Attached the obligation 2 defend by ins. co.
Shaffer v. Heitner
      Overrule quasi-in-rem
      Subst. law application doesnt translate into jud. jxn
      Est. Min. Contact of Int. Shoe requirement
      Due Process Clause used 2 overturn whats been accepted b/c not follow
      w/the notions of modern socs view
      Del. stocks were attached 2 get the directors
Burnham v. Superior Ct.
      Due Process
        1. Scalia claims that wont thrown out historically feasible things
        2. Brennan claims that evolves w/the era so the stands can D so apply
           Int. Shoe stand w/Ding X
      Physical Presence still good 4 jxn
      Accidental/Transitory Presence
        1.  Scalia--o.k.
        2.  Brennan--no P.A. b/c no choie & unilateral activity of someone not
            connected 2 D so no jxn.
      Facts
        1. Busi. trip then visit children for the weekend where served
Ins. Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee
      Consent by D that ct. in PA will have jxn 2 det. if have jxn
      Discovery Issue
M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.
      Consent in K 2 use London Ct.
      Admiralty isnt binding on state ct.
      Amer. cts cant B 2 parochial in international law
Carnival Cruise Lines v. Shute
      K w/selected forum
        1. FL has int.
        2. Cost lowered=AF by it
      Admiralty isnt binding on state ct.
Omni Capital international, Ltd. v. Rudolf Wolff & Co.
      Const Issue
        1. Fifth Amend.
        2. Contact w/entire US
      Statute
        Need it 4 the ability 2 serve process
      Rule 4(k)
        1.  Lec. 16
        2.  Serv. of summons effective
        3.  Jxn of gen jx of state ct--meet state statute req.
        4.  Impleader Rule of 100 miles
        5.  Authed by fed. law
        6.  Sub 2 addresses contact, pers. jxn, fed law, & not subj. 2 gen 
            jxn of state
      Fairness
        1.  Change in venue
        2.  Not pertinent 2 5th Amend. so less imp in fed. law
      Facts
        1. CEA act used
Rule 12
    Lec. 17
Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.
      Const.
        1. Suff of Notice under 14th Amend.
        2. Test--Rsbly calculated under all circs 2 afford them theopp. 2
           present objs
      Binding req. 4 min. notice 4 all states
Subj. Matter Jxn
      Dismiss any X ct lacks subj. matter jxn Rule 12)h)3
      Imp. 2 systemic rts of fed. govt & jud. pwr cant B waived by indiv.
      Diversity
        1. Art. III Sec. 2
        2. Suits btwn cit of dif. states, btwn cit. of state & alien
        3. Cong. Act of 1789--min. jxnal amt
        4. No incompl. diversity by Strawbridge v. Curtiss--=A71332
      Removal
        By =A71441 must have had orig. jxn
      Manufacturing Fed. Jxn
        Not allowed by =A71359--no improper collusive 2 manufacture
      Defeating Fed. Jxn--o.k.
      Cit of Fictitious names R disregarded by =A71441(a)
      Corporation
        By =A71332 c)1), its a cit. of any state where incorp & where it has 
        princ.  place of busi.
      Limited Partnership
        All cit. of partners count
Mas v. Perry
      Domicile
        Orig. b/c no intent 2 stay in LA
      Supplemental Jxn
        1. By =A71367 take other cases & sweep in
        2. Common nucleus of fact
        3. One person must @ least have orig. jxn
      Last paragraph of =A71332a--alien perm res., cit of the state
      Det of cit.--@ filing
      Burden of Proof--person who brings suit
      Min. Jxnal Amt
        1.  Appear 2 a legal certainty that the claim is really 4 less than 
            the jxnal amt 2 justify a dismissal
        2.  By =A71332b, Ct can deny costs 2 P & impose costs if P gets less 
            than jxnal amt
AFA Tours Inc v. Whitchurch
      Test 2 det. min. jxnal amt--unless legal certainty its less
      Ct. takes the active role in subj. matter jxn
      Injunction
        Both P & Ds values taken into acct
Backgrounds 2 Osborn
      Art III =A71--inferior cts
      Art III=A72--jud pwr 2 extend 2 law & equity arise under Const.  laws, & 
      treaties
      Specif. Jxnal Statutes--open up Dist. Cts
      28 USC =A71331--Gen Fed Quest Jxn; same lang. of Const
      28 USC =A71441--Removal Statute
Osborn v. Bank of the US
      Statute--gave C/A
     Const Issue--arise under meaning of Art III
      Orig. Ingredient 2 form a creature of fed. govt
Louisville & Nashville Co. v. Mottley
      28 USC =A71331--1875 gen fed.
      Well Pleaded
        1. Not really about Art III
        2. K case injecting fed. issues
      Sep. Statute--review states decs on fed. quests
      Restrictive Reading of =A71331
Skelly & Franchise Tax Case
      Declaratory Judgment Act of 1935--no good against well pleaded cases



Back to Law School Notes