1 / 16

CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 39

CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 39. Professor Fischer Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America November 25, 2002. WRAP-UP OF LAST CLASS. We learned about Glannon’s “third ring”, venue, which is an additional limitation on plaintiff’s choice of forum.

johnna
Download Presentation

CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 39

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 39 Professor Fischer Columbus School of Law The Catholic University of America November 25, 2002

  2. WRAP-UP OF LAST CLASS • We learned about Glannon’s “third ring”, venue, which is an additional limitation on plaintiff’s choice of forum. • We learned how to apply the general federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391.

  3. WHAT WILL WE DO TODAY? • Learn about some exceptions to the venue requirement in federal court. • Conclude our jurisdiction unit by review Practice Exercises 27 and 28. • Begin a new unit on finality of judgments by learning about claim preclusion (res judicata)

  4. Venue vs. Subject Matter Jurisiction • What are the differences between venue and subject matter jurisdiction?

  5. Venue vs. Subject Matter Jurisiction • What are the differences between venue and subject matter jurisdiction? • Venue can be waived - see 12(b)(3), 12(g), 12(h)(1) • Court does not have to question venue sua sponte as R. 12(h)(3) requires for subject matter jurisdiction • Parties can consent to what would otherwise be improper venue (using, for example, a forum selection clause)

  6. VENUE and COLLATERAL ATTACK • Unlike personal jurisdiction, proper venue is not a constitutional requirement for a valid judgment and cannot be raised by way of collateral attack.

  7. Courts Have Laid Down Exceptions to the Venue Requirements • One of the most important is exceptions is for actions that are removed to federal court (because removal statute specifies the district to which case must be removed at §1441(a)) • Another example - “local” suits that must be brought in district where land is located. Most actions are not “local” but “transitory”.

  8. PRACTICE EXERCISE 27 • CB 707

  9. PRACTICE EXERCISE 27 • UA is NH corporation, only place of business is in NH • 12(b)(2) motion to dismiss • Statutory question - does the long-arm statute apply to UA? Which provision? • Constitutional question - is the exercise of jurisdiction over UA constitutional under the due process clause?

  10. PRACTICE EXERCISE 28 • CB 723-724 • Shaw v. NLS and Gloss

  11. FINALITY OF JUDGMENTS: CLAIM PRECLUSION • Also known as the doctrine of res judicata • What is res judicata? What is the purpose of res judicata? • What is the idea of “merger” and “bar” - see Restatement (2d) of Judgments s. 17 at CB p. 885 • What does FRCP 8 (c ) say about res judicata? Why? • NB. Res judicata can be waived!

  12. CLAIM PRECLUSION AND ENFORCEMENT • Once a damage claim succeeds, the claim becomes a claim on the money judgment. • P becomes judgment creditor, and D judgment debtor. • If D doesn’t satisfy judgment, P must bring an enforcement action vs. D. See R. 69(a) • Claim preclusion will help judgment creditor in this enforcement action. Judgment debtor cannot relitigate on the merits.

  13. CLAIM PRECLUSION V. ISSUE PRECLUSION • What is the basic difference between claim preclusion and issue preclusion? (see CB p. 884) • What is the difference between claim preclusion and stare decisis?

  14. CLAIM PRECLUSION • Does claim preclusion extend to claims only to claims that were made in the first lawsuit, or does it also extend to claims that could or should have been litigated in the first lawsuit? • What must D show to prove that res judicata bars a P’s claim (the elements of res judicata)?

  15. ELEMENTS OF CLAIM PRECLUSION • 1. Prior suit that proceeded to a final valid judgment on the merits • 2. Present suit arises out of same claim as the prior suit • 3. Same parties to both suits, or parties are in privity

  16. FINAL VALID JUDGMENT ON THE MERITS • VALID: To be valid, court rendering judgment must have valid subject matter and personal jurisdiction (if action dismissed for lack of p.j. or s.m.j., no claim preclusion for action brought in court with p.j. or s.m.j.) • You can’t argue that a judgment is invalid simply because it was based on error, e.g. relying on unconstitutional statute • Is a dismissal without prejudice a final valid judgment on the merits? See R. 41 • What about a dismissal under R. 41(b)? • Summary judgment in favor of P?

More Related