I.  Territorial Jurisdiction:

I.                    Exercising over citizens of the state

a.       In personam – present/resident/in the state (Burnham)

b.      In rem-- proceeds based on the property

                                                               i.      Quasi in rem type I -- dispute about property between 2 people who are claiming the land

                                                             ii.      Quasi in rem type II-- property is attached

1.      Establishes right to property but not about the property itself

c.       Pennoyer v. Neff (exercising jurisdiction within the boundaries of the state)

                                                               i.      States do not have in personam jurisdiction over non-residents, unless they are served within the state

                                                             ii.      In personam jurisdiction is appropriate when a company or individual has contacts, ties or relations within the state

                                                            iii.      Quasi-in rem jurisdiction: The action establishes a right to property, but the underlying dispute is unrelated to the property

                                                           iv.      No physical presence in state and property was not attached in the beginning of the suit.

d.      Two Methods to Challenge Territorial Jurisdiction

                                                               i.      Direct Attack

1.      Def appears before forum to object to the forums jurisdiction over him

a.       Special Appearance

                                                                                                                                       i.      Motion to Dismiss due to lack of territorial jurisdiction

                                                             ii.      Collateral Attack

1.      When a default judgment is taken and you challenge jurisdiction in a subsequent proceeding

II.                 Long arm statute

a.       Must be reviewed; rules and regulations of states to adjudicate over citizens of other states

b.      Must follow procedures of statute as far as how process served etc.

c.       Two Types of Statutes

                                                               i.      Authorizes jurisdiction to reach to the limits of Due Process (Texas)

                                                             ii.      Enumerated Acts

1.      Sets out circumstance under which state intends to authorize jurisdiction

a.       Ex. Bensosan v. King

                                                                                                                                       i.      NY statute that Fed Court used didn’t include the Def

b.      Ex. Omni Capital Intl v. Rudolf Wolff Co.

d.      Federal Long Arm Statutes

                                                               i.      Rule 4 (k) (1) (C) and (D)

1.      Congress provides Fed Courts have jurisdiction to bring in anyone with M/C w/ US

a.       Ex. Bankruptcy, Anti-Trust, Securities

b.      Interpleader

                                                                                                                                       i.      Life Ins. Example

1.      Diff Def/Diff States

2.      Now don’t have to try in each state

                                                             ii.      In absence of federal law or statute, look to the state’s long-arm statute

                                                            iii.      Rule 4 (k) (2)

1.      When you have a foreign Def and can’t reach with State’s long-arm statute can use the US for minimum contacts

a.       Arose from Omni Case

III.               Due Process

a.       Look at the P’s connection to the forum/look at the P’s minimum contacts

                                                               i.      Establishing minimum contacts:

1.      International Shoe v. Washington expanded Pennoyer

a.       did not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice

b.      When a non-resident exercises the privilege of conducting activities within a state, it enjoys the benefits and protection of the laws of that state; a procedure which requires the corporation to respond to a suit brought before them is hardly said to by undue

c.       Action can rise from activities in the state through the contacts or the relationship of the d to the forum

                                                                                                                                       i.      Specific jurisdiction

                                                                                                                                     ii.      General Jurisdiction

                                                             ii.      Specific jurisdiction (defendant/forum/litigation)

1.      Contacts give rise to litigation

a.       Contacts of D with the forum have to give rise to the litigation

                                                                                                                                       i.      International Shoe was an example

b.      Contacts also have to be sufficient

                                                                                                                                       i.      Even an occasional or singular act, b/c of its nature or quality of the act, can be sufficient for purpose of specific jurisdiction

1.      Mc. Ghee v. International Life

2.      International Shoe

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Shaffer v. Heitner established that in rem and in personam jurisdiction should both be established through minimal contacts because all adjudicate in the interest of the forum

                                                                                                                                    iii.      In Asahi, the contacts weren’t sufficient and it was found that putting products into the stream of commerce isn’t purposeful availment (Plurality Decision)

1.      WW Volkswagen said the same thing

                                                                                                                                   iv.      Result of purposeful availment/direction (have a reason to believe that you can be haled to court in the forum state)

1.      Definitions: deliberately engaged in significant activities within a State or has created continuing obligations between himself and residents of the forum

a.       Has availed himself of the privilege of conducting business there and because his activities are shielded by the “benefits and protections” of the forum’s laws it is presumptively not unreasonable to require him to submit to the burdens of litigation in that forum as well. (Burger King v. Rudzewicz)

b.      Def knows he is likely to be sued in that jurisdiction

2.      Awareness Plus Test (Asahi)- Must indicate a purpose to serve the market in the state/market

a.       Designing the product for the market or the forum state

b.      Establishing channels for providing regular advice to customers in the forum state

c.       Advertising

d.      Marketing the product through a distributor

3.      Tests of Purposeful Availment:

a.       In state activity

b.      Effects test

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Calder v. Jones

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.      Keeton v. Hustler

c.       Contract

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Burger King v. Rudewicz

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.      When breached, look at:

                                                                                                                                                                                                            iii.      Examine negotiations

                                                                                                                                                                                                           iv.      Contemplated future of consequences

                                                                                                                                                                                                             v.      Terms of Contract

                                                                                                                                                                                                           vi.      Actual course of dealings

d.      Marketing (serving the market)

                                                            iii.      General jurisdiction (defendant and the forum)

1.      Continued and systematic and sufficient contacts with the forum that are substantial and of such nature to justify suit on unrelated causes of action

a.       Perkins v. Benquet –Phillipine island mining co that had shut down all operations during WWII

                                                                                                                                       i.      Moved to Ohio, corporate bank accounts, office, held directors meetings, sent out correspondence, paid the bills

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Ohio had become the defacto business corporation and established general jurisdiction Defacto corporation office (Perkins v. Benquet)

2.      What’s sufficient:

a.       Principle Place of Business

b.      Physical location (Wal-Mart)

c.       Significant sales

                                                                                                                                       i.      Comparative to instate business activities

3.      What’s not:

a.       Advertising (good enough for purposeful availment, but not general jurisdiction)

b.      Purchases

c.       Insignificant sales

4.      Helicol said that the business had to by systematic and that a mere purchase would not purport someone to jurisdiction in a place where they purchased the good

                                                           iv.      Fairness and Reasonableness factors: est. by Burger King

1.      Look at this after Specific or General Jurisdiction has been established

2.      P interest in the forum

3.      Efficient resolution of a controversy

4.      State substantive social policy

5.      Burden on D

a.       Forum non conveniens: common law doctrine under which a court in appropriate circumstances may decline to exercise its jurisdiction to the interest of the easy, expeditious and inexpensive resolution of a controversy in another form

6.      Forum’s interest in adjudicating

IV.              Notice and Service

a.       Can be served if within a state (Burnham v. Superior Court of Ca)

                                                               i.      Scalia view was very strict

1.      Only needed to be within borders to be served unless placed in state by coercion or duress

                                                             ii.      Brennen believes it must be fair

1.      Must be enjoying the fruits of the economy or benefits of the state

                                                            iii.      Must be served through processor if you are a corp.

b.      Service of Process

                                                               i.      Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank and Trust

1.      Means employed must be those that a person desiring to inform the absentees would reasonably adopt

a.       Means in case were inadequate not b/c it didn’t reach everyone but b/c it failed to reach those who could have been easily informed

2.      Must have reasonable time to respond

                                                             ii.      Mennonite Case

1.      Only looking for one person (instead of 100’s) should have made more effort to find them

                                                            iii.      Greene v. Lindsey

1.      Court ruled that eviction notice on door not enough should have mailed as well.

c.       Rules to Serve Individual

                                                               i.      Personal Service

                                                             ii.      Leave summons at usual place of abode w/ someone of suitable age and discretion that resides there

                                                            iii.      Delivery to an Agent

                                                           iv.      Service by Mail (Waiver Method)

                                                             v.      In compliance with state law

d.      Rules to Serve Corporation

                                                               i.      Official Agent

                                                             ii.      Service by mail

                                                            iii.      In compliance with state law

V.                 Consent to Territorial Jurisdiction

a.       Pre-Suit Consent

                                                               i.      Consent by Agreement/Contract

1.      Agreement in advance

2.      Forum Selection Clause

a.       Specifies particular forum to the exclusion of all others

b.      Ex. Carnival Cruise v. Shute

3.      Consent to Jurisdiction Clause

a.       Suit to be brought to forum but not exclusive

b.      Post-Suit Consent

                                                               i.      Making a general appearance

1.      Not answering

2.      Appearing w/out making a special appearance

                                                             ii.      Special Appearance

1.      Complying to requirements to properly assert a TJ objection

a.       In Fed must be first thing you file

                                                                                                                                       i.      Objection to Courts Territorial Jurisdiction

b.      In Texas must file first and everything else filed is subject to special appearance

                                                            iii.      TJ as a personal right can be waived

1.      Ins Corp of Ireland v. CBG

a.       By not complying with discovery orders to determine if court had jurisdiction the court held that they did have jurisdiction

 

II.                 Subject Matter Jurisdiction

a.       Court’s authority to adjudicate a particular type of claim

                                                               i.      Not Waivable

1.      Am Fire and Casualty v. Finn

                                                             ii.      Court must have both TJ and SMJ to adjudicate

b.      Constitutional and Statutory Framework

                                                               i.      Constitution creates Fed Govt with limited enumerated acts

1.      Original Jurisdiction

a.       Gives court power to hear the case in the first instance

2.      Appellant Jurisdiction

a.       Gives court power to hear the case on appeal

3.      Concurrent Jurisdiction

a.       Most cases that fall w/in SMJ of Fed Court could be filed in State court

4.      Exclusive Jurisdiction

a.       Only can be brought in Federal Court, states cannot hear them

                                                                                                                                       i.      Bankruptcy, Admiralty, Patents

1.      Fed Anti Trust not in statute but is interpreted as exclusive

c.       Federal Question Subject Matter Jurisdiction

                                                               i.      Article III, Sec 2

1.      Actions arising under the constitution, the laws of US, and treaties

a.       Some statues provide remedies for federally created organizations

                                                                                                                                       i.      Osborne v. Bank of US

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Red Cross

b.      In Bankruptcy if civil suits are related to bankruptcy they can be moved to federal court

                                                                                                                                       i.      Dow Korning (Breast implants)

                                                             ii.      Well Pleaded Complaint Rule

1.      Complaint that contains only those elements necessary to the P’s cause of action

2.      Does not include anticipated defenses

a.       Ex.  Louisville & Nashville RR v. Motley

3.      Policy behind the WPC Rule

a.       To provide certainty at beginning of lawsuit whether court has jurisdiction

b.      If allowed case to be brought to Fed Court strictly on anticipated defenses the courts would be overloaded

4.      Rule does not apply to Constitutional standard

a.       Congress could pass statute that says any case that brings Fed defense could be tried in Fed Ct

                                                            iii.      Holmes Test

1.      Suit arises under the law creates the cause of action

a.       Statute creates a right and provides authorization to sue (remedy)

                                                                                                                                       i.      Ex. Title 7 gives rights and provides right to sue

2.      Sometimes remedy might be implied in statute but not specifically stated

                                                           iv.      Substantial Federal Issue Test

1.      Even if state law cause of action can still have Fed Q SMJ if right to relief necessarily depends on a substantial issue of Federal Law

a.       Ex.  Smith v. Kansas City

                                                                                                                                       i.      Only issue is whether bonds are unconstitutional and right to relief depended on that determination.

b.      Merrell Dow Pharm v. Thompson

                                                                                                                                       i.      Diff in this case was Fed ? was not the only ? and could show negligence w/out it

d.      Diversity of Citizenship Jurisdiction

                                                               i.      Art III, Sec 2

1.      Between citizens of different states

2.      Between states, or its citizens and foreign state, citizens

3.      Purpose

a.       To prevent bias of instate claims

4.      Requires Both Complete Diversity and Amount in Controversy

a.       Complete Diversity

                                                                                                                                       i.      Based on when suit is filed

                                                                                                                                     ii.      To determine Citizenship

1.      Individual

a.       Make sure citizen of US

b.      Where Domiciled

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Domicile

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.      US citizen

                                                                                                                                                                                                            iii.      Resides in state with intent to remain

2.      Partnerships, Unions, unincorporated assoc, joint ventures

a.       You are citizen of each state that one of the members is a citizen of

3.      Corporations

a.       Where incorporated and principal place of business

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Place of operations Test

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.      Nerve Center Test

                                                                                                                                                                                                            iii.      Total Activity Test

                                                                                                                                    iii.      Alienage Jurisdiction

1.      Citizens v. Aliens

                                                                                                                                   iv.      Complete diversity b/n citizens and Aliens on the other side

1.      Fra and TX v. OK and Eng – Yes

2.      Fra and TX v. Eng - No

b.      Amount in Controversy

                                                                                                                                       i.      Must exceed $75,000

1.      Excludes interest and costs

2.      Actual amount in controversy not amount recovered

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Legal Certainty Test

1.      Accept P’s good faith amount unless legally certainty that P would not receive greater then $75,000

a.       Ex. Hotel saying you can only recover $500 if valuables not left in hotel safe

2.      Injunctions

a.       Look at both P and Def and if either’s claim is over $75,000 then would meet rules

                                                                                                                                    iii.      Aggregation Rule

1.      Add all you damage claims together even if arising from diff claims

a.       Can not aggregate multiple defendants

III.               Venue and Removal

a.       Removal

                                                               i.      Transfer an action pending in state court system of Fed Court System

1.      1441 a)

a.       Removes an action from State to Fed if the action could have originally been filed in Fed Court

b.      Its Def right to move

c.       Must be from state to Fed

d.      Must be in same district and division as state court

e.       Action could have been filed originally in Fed court

2.      Remove on Fed Q SMJ

a.       Look at well pleaded complaint rule

b.      Essentially the same as the original jurisdiction on Fed Court based on Fed Q SMJ

c.       If P wants to forgo an available Fed remedy then they have the right to do so in cases where they have a choice b/n suing under a Fed or State statute

                                                                                                                                       i.      Ex. Title 7 or TCHRA

3.      Remove on Diversity SMJ

a.       None of the Def’s can be a citizen of state which action is brought

4.      How can P stop removal

a.       Lower the amount in controversy to under $75,000

b.      File suit in the Def state forum

c.       Try to add another in state Def

                                                                                                                                       i.      Can not be fraudulent

5.      Procedure

a.       File notice of removal with Fed court and let the state court know that the case is gone

b.      You have 30 days to file removal

                                                                                                                                       i.      In Diversity Cases

1.      One Year Provision

a.       Can move 30 days after any amendments or changes as long as not greater then a year since case has been filed

c.       One Year Provision

d.      Motion to remand would be filed by P to attempt to stop

                                                                                                                                       i.      Filed in Fed Court

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Must be filed 30 days after removal

b.      Venue

                                                               i.      Based on statutes

1.      Fairness and convenience of Def

                                                             ii.      Based on Districts

1.      Houston is in Southern District of TX (Need to Know)

                                                            iii.      Venue Statutes

1.      Many causes of action have their own venue provisions

                                                           iv.      Local Actions

1.      Title to real estate must be in district in which real estate is located

                                                             v.      Transitory Actions

1.      1391

a.       Can choose either

                                                                                                                                       i.      Any district in which any Def resides if all Def reside in the same state

1.      Individual

a.       Residence not domicile some states

b.      Some courts use domicile

2.      Corporation

a.       Any district in which it is subject to personal jurisdiction

3.      Unincorporated Assoc.

a.       Most likely any district where it is a citizen of

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Bring in district in which substantial part of events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred

                                                                                                                                    iii.      If both fail then

1.      Any Def is subject to personal jurisdiction

2.      1406 Improper Venue

a.       Def must immediately file or waive right to change venue

                                                                                                                                       i.      If court agrees

1.      Can dismiss

2.      Transfer to any district of division in which it could have been brought

3.      1404 Provides movement for convenience

a.       Convenience of Parties and Witnesses

                                                                                                                                       i.      Location of witnesses and parties/distance

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Evidence

                                                                                                                                    iii.      View premises

                                                                                                                                   iv.      Serving subpoenas

b.      Interest of Justice

                                                                                                                                       i.      Jury Bias/Media attention

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Relationship of forum to dispute

                                                                                                                                    iii.      Judge’s familiarity with the law

                                                                                                                                   iv.      Judicial efficiency (Docket Size)

c.       P’s choice of forum is being balanced against all of these other factors

d.      Ferens v. John Deere

4.      Forum Non Conveniens

a.       Dismissal rather then transfer

b.      Used when going from one sovereign to another sovereign

                                                                                                                                       i.      Ex. US v. Scotland, TX v. OK

c.       Need greater showing of inconvenience

d.      Uses essentially the same factor as 1404

                                                                                                                                       i.      P’s interest in forum must be substantially outweighed

e.       Fairness and Reasonableness factors from Asahi is what is essentially used here

                                                                                                                                       i.      Piper Case

IV.              Choice of Law Rules

a.       Horizontal Choice of Law – State v. State

                                                               i.      State will apply its choice of law rules to determine which state law applies

                                                             ii.      Choice of law principles govern what state law you are going to use

1.      Look at Class Hypo

b.      Vertical Choice of Law – State v. Federal

                                                               i.      The Erie Problem

1.      Background

a.       What would you do when the state law differed from the General Common law?

                                                                                                                                       i.      Swift v. Tyson

1.      Fed court would follow the general common law

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Rules of Decision

1.      The laws of the several states, except where the Const, treaties and laws of the US otherwise require shall be regarded as the rules of decision in cases where they apply

2.      Swift excluded judge made law

2.      Erie RR v. Tompkins

a.       Supreme Court overruled Swift Decision

                                                                                                                                       i.      There is no Fed General Common law

                                                                                                                                     ii.      3 Reasons why Supreme Court Overruled

1.      Rules of Decision Act

a.       Swift court did not include judge made common law.

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Now includes all sources of law

2.      Defects of Swift v. Tyson

a.       Forum Shopping

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Brown and Yellow Cab example

b.      Uniformity b/n state law and federal law was no longer happening

3.      Swift was unconstitutional

a.       This is questionable and ignored when using the Erie test

3.      The Twin Aims of Erie

a.       Prevent forum shopping b/n state and federal courts

b.      Prevent inequitable administration of the law

                                                                                                                                       i.      Stop what happened in Taxi Cab case

4.      Erie Test

a.       Is this issue purely substantive law?

                                                                                                                                       i.      Black Letter Law

1.      What is necessary to recover or prevent recovery

                                                                                                                                     ii.      If yes then State Law Applies according to Erie’s defn of RDA

1.      Unless there is preemption

a.       Fed Statute specifically provides to the contrary

                                                                                                                                    iii.      How does court determine what State Law is?

1.      Use opinions of highest court of that state as a guide

2.      Use the Erie Guess

a.       If highest state court hasn’t given an answer the Fed court must make its best guess using

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Other states high courts

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.      Lower state courts

                                                                                                                                                                                                            iii.      Look at SC dicta

                                                                                                                                                                                                           iv.      Law Review articles

                                                                                                                                                                                                             v.      Restatement provisions

3.      Procedure to get approval from State Court

a.       Certification

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Very time consuming

b.      Is the issue controlled by a Federal Procedural Statute or Federal Rule?

                                                                                                                                       i.      Rules Enabling Act

1.      SC shall have the power to proscribe rules of practice procedure and rules of evidence

2.      Rules can not abridge, enlarge or modify any substantive right

                                                                                                                                     ii.      A Federal Rule of Civil Procedure controls as long as it meets requirements of Constitution and REA

1.      If Yes then use the Federal Rule

c.       Is the state procedural rule bound up with or an integral part of rights and obligations of the parties?

                                                                                                                                       i.      Yes, then apply state law

                                                                                                                                     ii.      No, then:

1.      Outcome Determinative Test (Modified)

a.       If outcome would come out differently if the state practice was employed and that diff would influence the choice of forum

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      No, then Fed Law

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.      Yes, then use Byrd Balancing Test

                                                                                                                                                                                                            iii.      Is there a countervailing Federal interest that trumps the need for uniformity b/n the Fed and State law

                                                                                                                                                                                                           iv.      If Yes then Fed Law

                                                                                                                                                                                                             v.      If No then State

V.                 Pleadings

a.       Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

                                                               i.      Rule 7

1.      Complaint

a.       P’s original written statement setting forth a claim

b.      Conditional Imperative

                                                                                                                                       i.      Those conditions that are required to exist for a P to have a right under the substantive law

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Complaint is valid if all conditions have been alleged

2.      Answer

a.       Def’s assertion in written statement setting forth grounds of defense

3.      Counter-claim

a.       Claim for relief asserted against an opposing party in response to the opposing parties claim of relief

4.      Cross Claim

a.       Claim by a party against a co-party

5.      Third Party Complaint

a.       Asserting a claim against a person who is not presently a party of the lawsuit

6.      Reply

a.       P’s answer to the Def’s counterclaim

                                                             ii.      Allocating Elements

1.      Usually by precedent

2.      Statute

a.       Enacting Clause

                                                                                                                                       i.      Clause the creates the right for a cause of action

3.      Balancing Considerations

a.       Policy

                                                                                                                                       i.      Is this cause of action favored or disfavored?

1.      Favored

a.       Less allocation to P, more to Def

2.      Disfavored

a.       Less allocation to Def, more to P

b.      Fairness

                                                                                                                                       i.      Which party had better access to the information of proof

1.      More fair to allocate to the party that has access to the information

c.       Probability

                                                                                                                                       i.      That the party seeking the deviation from the norm should have the burden

1.      Norm in litigation or society?

a.       Paying Bills

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Society – most people pay bills

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.      Litigation – in most suits people in court are there b/c they didn’t pay their bills

4.      Burden of Pleading

a.       Party that must allege existence of fact or situation

5.      Burden of Proof

a.       Burden of Production

                                                                                                                                       i.      Party that must produce sufficient evidence to allow the jury or fact finder to find in its favor

1.      When you have enough to go to jury

b.      Burden of Persuasion

                                                                                                                                       i.      Party bearing the risk of non persuasion

1.      Preponderance of Evidence

a.       More likely then not that these facts or situation occurred

b.      50-50 chance then you lose

c.       Clear and convincing evidence

d.      Beyond a reasonable doubt

c.        Most cases the party that pleads most prove

                                                            iii.      Sufficient Statement of Claim

1.      Rule 8

a.       Short and plain statement of claim showing pleader is entitled to relief

b.      Include statement of jurisdiction

c.       Demand for judgment

                                                                                                                                       i.      Prayer

1.      Amount is not a limitation

d.      Concise and Direct

                                                                                                                                       i.      Rule 9 (b)

1.      With respect for fraud

2.      Rule 10

a.       Provide a Caption

                                                                                                                                       i.      Identify parties

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Names of parties

                                                                                                                                    iii.      File #

                                                                                                                                   iv.      Nature of the pleading

b.      Body

                                                                                                                                       i.      Info from Rule 8

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Done in separate paragraphs

1.      Referenced for Def’s answer

2.      Each limited to a single set of circumstances

c.       Signature – Rule 11

3.      Rule 11

a.       Not for improper purpose

b.      Legal contentions warranted by law or well intentioned argument

c.       Facts and allegations have evidentiary support or are likely to have

d.      Sanctions

                                                                                                                                       i.      Non-monetary as well as monetary

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Safe handler Rule

1.      21 days notice to pull down claim

b.      Defendant’s Response

                                                               i.      Motions from 12 (b)

1.      Waivable

a.       Must be contained in first motion with court or they are waived

b.      Personal Jurisdiction

c.       Improper Venue

d.      Insufficiency of Process

                                                                                                                                       i.      Something wrong with process papers

e.       Insufficiency of Service of Process

                                                                                                                                       i.      Something wrong with service

f.        Motion to make more definite and certain 12 (e)

                                                                                                                                       i.      Must be so vague and ambiguous that opposing party could not reasonable be required to respond

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Grants

1.      P has 10 days to amend, then Def has 10 days

                                                                                                                                    iii.      Denies

1.      Def has 10 days to answer

a.       Can Def then file motion for PJ

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      No, already availed himself

2.      Not waivable if not in first motion

a.       Challenge SMJ

b.      Failure to state a claim Rule 12 (b)(6)

                                                                                                                                       i.      Assume that everything P says in complaint is true it still does not state a valid claim

1.      Law does not recognize a cause of action

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Only be granted if it appears beyond a doubt that the P can prove no set of facts that would entitle him to a claim for relief

                                                                                                                                    iii.      Preference is to judge cases on what evidence reveals rather then on technicalities

                                                                                                                                   iv.      Not giving up right to challenge or disprove P’s case later if denied

c.       Failure to join a party

                                                             ii.      Answer

1.      Include all 12 (b) motions

a.       Only if you have not already filed a motion

2.      Admit or deny allegations in P’s complaint

a.       Admit

                                                                                                                                       i.      Establishes as true, accepted as fact

                                                                                                                                     ii.      No need to produce any evidence at trial

b.      Deny

                                                                                                                                       i.      Puts P to his proof

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Def can provide contrary evidence

                                                                                                                                    iii.      Done in the form of “Not”

1.      PB Gun did no negligently mfg gun

c.       Without knowledge or info sufficient to from belief

                                                                                                                                       i.      Same effect as denial

                                                                                                                                     ii.      When you receive info sufficient to form belief you must amend pleading

3.      Affirmative Defenses:

1.      Accord and satisfaction

a.       Substitute agreement and a perform of that agreement

2.      Arbitration and award

a.       Had an arbitration hearing and someone has issued an award

3.      Assumption of risk

a.       You assume the risk by being an actor (i.e.: sports)

4.      Contributory negligence

5.      Discharge in bankruptcy

a.       At the end of bankruptcy, the court will discharge all of your debts

6.      Duress

a.       Wrongful coercion to make someone perform an act

7.      Estoppel

a.       Stopped from taking inconsistent positions to the detriment to another

                                                                                                                                                   i.      Someone’s injured on the job and go to SS administration – employer will have to provide additional payments to SS

                                                                                                                                                 ii.      Then he sues under ADA – limited to your work…employer has to try to make reasonable accommodations to your ability

1.      Can’t be partially and fully disabled at the same time

2.      Never a problem unless you cause someone detriment

8.      Failure of consideration

9.      Fraud

a.       Misrepresentation that you relied upon

10.  Illegality

a.       Gambling contracts…don’t pay a contract, you can make a defense that it’s illegal

11.  Injury by fellow servant

12.  Laches

a.       Substitute for the statute of limitations

b.      Equity situation where we’re looking at an unreasonable delay to the other party

13.  License

a.       Consent…license to be on a particular property = defense to trespass

14.  Payment

15.  Release

a.       Signed a release to waive any and all claims

16.  Res judicata

a.       Dealing with a matter that has been settled by judgment

17.  Statute of frauds

18.  Statute of limitations

19.  Waiver

a.       Intentional relinquishment of a known right

20.  Any other matter constituting an avoidance or affirmative defense

21.  P does not have to reply

a.       Presumed denial

4.      Counter Claim

a.       P must reply

b.      Same response option as original defense

c.       Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

                                                               i.      Policy

1.      Pleadings have minimal role in resolving dispute

a.       Used so parties can inform the court of their claims and defenses so discovery can begin

                                                             ii.      When Necessary?

1.      Correct deficiency in pleadings

2.      Forgot something

a.       Additional claims, sued wrong party

3.      May have been events that occurred since the pleading has been filed

                                                            iii.      Difference b/n Amended and Supplemental

1.      Temporal

a.       Supplemental

                                                                                                                                       i.      Transactions, events or occurrences that have happened since the pleadings to be supplemented

b.      Amended

                                                                                                                                       i.      Happened before the pleadings

2.      Effect

a.       Supplement

                                                                                                                                       i.      Supplements it, does not replace

b.      Amended

                                                                                                                                       i.      Replaces the prior pleading

                                                           iv.      Rule 15 (A) Two Types of Non-Trial Amendments

1.      Amendments made as a matter of course

a.       Is a Response of Pleading Necessary?

                                                                                                                                       i.      Yes

1.      You have until response of pleading is served to file one amendment

2.      Def would get 10 additional days or the original period

a.       Whichever is longer

                                                                                                                                     ii.      No

1.      Has the action been placed on a trial calendar?

a.       Yes

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Need leave or consent

b.      No

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Then allowed one amendment within 20 days of original pleading

2.      Amendments made with Leave of the Court or Written consent of Adv. Party

a.       Shall be freely given when justice so requires

                                                                                                                                       i.      Must be prejudicing opponent to not be stated

                                                             v.      Rule 15 (B) Amendments to Conform to Evidence

1.      Expressed or Implied Consent

a.       Expressed

                                                                                                                                       i.      Issue that no one had plead

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Evidence shows you are trying this matter

b.      Implied

                                                                                                                                       i.      During trial issue comes up outside the pleading and other party does not object

2.      Does amendment prejudice the other party?

a.       During trial issue comes up outside the pleading and the other party objects

                                                                                                                                       i.      Up to Judge to determine

                                                           vi.      Rule 15 (C) Relation Back of Amendments

1.      Rationale of Statute of Limitations

a.       Prevent prejudice to Def from passage of time

                                                                                                                                       i.      Harder to obtain evidence needed about P’s claim

2.      Relate back Claim

a.       Arose out of the conduct, transaction or occurrence set forth or attempted to be set forth in original pleading

b.      Ex Tiller

                                                                                                                                       i.      Should have kept records on anything involving the P’s death

1.      Same conduct, transaction or occurrence

3.      Relate Back Party

a.       Same transaction, occurrence set forth or attempted to be set forth in original pleading

b.      Have 120 days to serve after filing of the complaint of institution of action

                                                                                                                                       i.      Identity of Interest

1.      Ex. Sue the wrong corp. but it’s related to the correct corp.

2.      Parties are so closely related that institution of action against one serves to provide notice of the litigation to the other

3.      Ex. use wrong name but have right address (J. Thomas Wright instead of Thomas J Wright)

c.       Party must have known or should have known that it would have been sued but for a mistake

                                                                                                                                       i.      Diff b/n mistake and lack of knowledge

1.      7 or 11 circuits adopted this viewpoint

2.      Ex. Worthington v. Wilson

VI.              Joinder and Supplement Jurisdiction

a.       Joinder of Claims and Parties

                                                               i.      Why Liberal Joinder Rules

1.      Allow large lawsuits

2.      Helps cut down on multiple actions

a.       Resolve multiple claims in one proceeding

                                                             ii.      Joinder of Claims

1.      Rule 18 Joinder of Claims and Remedies

a.       A party asserting claim for relief may join as many claims as it has against opposing party

b.      Once one is valid you can assert as many as you like

2.      Rule 13

a.       Counterclaims

                                                                                                                                       i.      Claim for relief against an opposing party in response to the opposing parties claim for relief

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Compulsory

1.      Arises out of the same transaction or occurrences

2.      Waived if not asserted unless:

a.       The claim is pending in another action

b.      Another party needs to be included but there is no jurisdiction over that party

                                                                                                                                    iii.      Permissive

1.      Does not arises out of the same transaction or concurrence

2.      Can be totally unrelated claims, just need a logical relationship

3.      Rule 13 (h)

a.       Add additional parties on a counterclaim as long as you are in accordance with Rules 19 and 20

                                                            iii.      Joinder of Parties

1.      Rule 20 Permissive Joinder

a.       Arises out of the same transaction or occurrence

b.      Common Question of law or fact

2.      Rule 19 Necessary and Indispensable Parties

a.       Necessary

                                                                                                                                       i.      Party to be joined if feasible

1.      In the parties absence complete relief cannot be afforded among the other parties

2.      The parties have some interest that they need to protect

3.      Risk of inconsistent obligations

b.      Indispensable

                                                                                                                                       i.      Necessary and the case should not proceed without them

3.      Cross Claim – Rule 13 (g)

a.       Claim against co-party arising out of the same transaction or occurrence

b.      As long as you have one the other cross claims can come in

4.      Rule 14 3rd Party Claims (Impleader)

a.       May file 3rd Party complaint against a party who is or may be liable to the 3rd Party P for all or part of a claim asserted against the 3rd Party P

b.      Anytime somebody has a claim asserted against them they can file a 3rd party claim

                                                                                                                                       i.      Check SMJ and make sure its w/in the rules

5.      Class Actions

a.       Allows a suit brought on behalf of a class of individuals that is too numerous to join practically by a representative

                                                                                                                                       i.      One person acts as representative of group or class

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Too many people to join practically

                                                                                                                                    iii.      Same transactions or occurrences

                                                                                                                                   iv.      Establish that class action is superior way then individual claims

6.      Intervention

a.       Process where someone can intervene in a lawsuit as P or Def

                                                                                                                                       i.      Intervene by right

1.      Usually Rule 19 but just haven’t been brought up

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Intervene permissibly

7.      Interpleader

a.       Allows a stakeholder to obtain a judicial determination regarding obligations to competing claimants

b.      2 Basis

                                                                                                                                       i.      Statute § 1335

1.      SMJ based on minimal diversity and AIC of $500

2.      Nationwide service of process

3.      Venue must be brought in one of the districts where P resides

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Rule 22

1.      SMJ based on complete diversity and AIC of $75,000

2.      TJ based on the normal minimal contacts analysis

3.      Venue can bring anywhere where a substantial part of the claims occurred

b.      Jurisdiction and Joinder

                                                               i.      Independent Basis

1.      Has its own basis b/c it meets SMJ requirements

                                                             ii.      Supplemental Jurisdiction

1.      Allows court to exercise jurisdiction over claims against existing parties or claims b/n existing and new parties even when there wouldn’t be grounds for SMJ

2.      Test for Common Nucleus of Operative Fact (UMW v. Gibbs)

3.      Art III, Sec 2

a.       Cases and Controversies

b.      Judicial power shall be extended to all cases

c.       Judicial power extends to state law claims when they have a common nucleus of operative fact

d.      Court does not have to hear the claim

                                                                                                                                       i.      Judicial economy, convergence fairness

4.      28 USC § 1367

a.       Provides for supplemental jurisdiction when the claims from one case or controversy under Art III, § 2 with the original jurisdiction of the federal courts

b.      Diversity Limitation

                                                                                                                                       i.      No supplemental jurisdiction by P’s against persons made parties under Rule 14, 19, 20, 24

1.      14- Impleader

2.      19- Necessary and Indispensable

3.      20- Joinder of Parties

4.      24- Intervention

                                                                                                                                     ii.      No Supplemental Jurisdiction with respect to claims by persons purposed to be joined as P’s under Rule 19 and 24

                                                                                                                                    iii.      Allows Fed Courts not to hear a case that meets supplemental jurisdiction when it involves a state law that dominates or is complicated

                                                                                                                                   iv.      Tolling for Statute of limitations

                                                                                                                                     v.      Rule 20 and compulsory cc will always meet b/c it arises out of the same transaction or occurrence as P’s claim against D

                                                                                                                                   vi.      Only permissive cc are for set-off but the courts are split

                                                                                                                                  vii.      Rule 23 is not a listed exception

1.      Causes much conflict b/n the circuits

5.      Subject Matter Jurisdiction Flow Chart

6.       

VII.            Pretrial

a.       Discovery

                                                               i.      By engaging in wide open discovery processes more likely to find the truth

1.      Decided on evidence not procedural gamesmanship

                                                             ii.      Scope

1.      Rule 26

a.       Non privileged matter that is relevant to a parties claim or defense can be discovered

b.      Reasonably calculated to lead to discovery of other admissible evidence

                                                                                                                                       i.      Hearsay

1.      Can’t use as evidence

2.      But you may use in discovery

c.       Subject Matter Discovery

                                                                                                                                       i.      Judge may allow if there is a good cause

d.      Mechanism for obtaining Protective Order

                                                                                                                                       i.      Protects litigants from unduly harassing, expensive, burdensome discovery

                                                            iii.      Mechanics of Discovery

1.      Methods

a.       Interrogatories

                                                                                                                                       i.      Written question addressed from one party to another

b.      Deposition

                                                                                                                                       i.      Witness under oath, attorney asks questions

1.      Advantages

a.       Ask follow up questions

b.      Attorney don’t answer depo questions

c.       Can depose anyone even if not a party

c.       Physical and Mental Examinations

                                                                                                                                       i.      Insanity or Medical malpractice cases

d.      Request for Admissions

                                                                                                                                       i.      Asking other side to admit or deny certain facts or documents are authentic or admissible

e.       Request for Production of Documents

                                                                                                                                       i.      Produce documents on certain topics

f.        Informal Discovery

                                                                                                                                       i.      Discovery outside the structure of formal discovery rules

g.       Initial Disclosures

                                                                                                                                       i.      Rule 26 A disclosures

1.      Requires parties exchange certain basic info to other side w/out asking

a.       All info party might use to support claims or defense

b.      Witnesses, documents

                                                           iv.      Privileges

1.      Work Product

a.       Two competing policies

                                                                                                                                       i.      Clash b/n discovery being essential to discovering the truth

                                                                                                                                     ii.      A concern to protect strategy, mental impression and inclusions of an attorney prepare for trial

b.      Concerns

                                                                                                                                       i.      Attorney might have to become a witness

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Could sway the litigation if relying on an attorneys memory of oral conversation

c.       Rule 26 B

                                                                                                                                       i.      Documents and tangible things

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial

1.      Atty and parties prep for trial

                                                                                                                                    iii.      Opinion work product

1.      Almost if not totally undiscoverable

2.      Attorney/Client Privilege

a.       Encourages frank communications b/n attorney and client

                                                                                                                                       i.      Assures Atty can give adequate representation

b.      Protect communications of documents

                                                                                                                                       i.      Not the underlying facts

c.       Corporations

                                                                                                                                       i.      Only Control Group is client

1.      SC said this test is no longer valid

2.      Subject Matter Test

a.       Communication by employee came within scope of his duties to corp.

                                                             v.      Dismissals and Settlement

1.      How does litigation end?

1.      Default judgment

a.       D fails to make any kind of appearance…the P can take a default judgment

2.      Can also be dismissed under 12b1-12b5

a.       Improper jurisdiction, etc.

                                                                                                                                                   i.      But they can be refilled in another court, assuming the statute of limitations hasn’t expired

3.      12b6

a.       Failure to state a claim

b.      Operates as a judgment

                                                                                                                                                   i.      Can’t refile that

1.      Determination that the claim has no merit under the law

4.      Motion for judgment on the Pleadings

a.       Rule 12C

                                                                                                                                                   i.      Same as motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, but it’s at a different time in the litigation and either party can move for this

                                                                                                                                                 ii.      It appears beyond doubt that one party or the other party is entitled to prevail

1.      i.e.: D admits allegations of the P’s complaint

2.      i.e.: if the P has failed to adequately state a claim

                                                                                                                                                iii.      Either party can move…difference from 12b6 motion

                                                                                                                                               iv.      12C has to wait until the pleadings are closed…usually the court will enter an order saying that pleadings must cease

5.      Dismissal by the P…may just decide that it wants out

a.       Wants a “do over”

b.      Take one voluntary dismissal and refile in state courts

                                                                                                                                                   i.      Only once if the P does it all by itself

                                                                                                                                                 ii.      Before D has filed an answer or motion for summary judgment

                                                                                                                                                iii.      Alter the pleadings to move to another court

c.       Can also do a voluntary dismissal if the other party will agree

                                                                                                                                                   i.      At any time

                                                                                                                                                 ii.      Can be done multiple times

d.      Can also ask the court so you can refile it

                                                                                                                                                   i.      Can be done at any time and multiple times

6.      Dismissal for failure to prosecute

a.       Sometimes P fails to prosecute the action

                                                                                                                                                   i.      Files and nothing happens

b.      Can’t go back and litigate

                                                                                                                                                   i.      P’s ability is limited to process later

7.      Settlement

a.       Just a contract

b.      Parties agree that the P will release his claims or promise not to sue

                                                                                                                                                   i.      Covenant not to sue

                                                                                                                                                 ii.      Bargained for exchange

                                                           vi.      Summary Judgment

1.      Summary Judgment

a.       Binding and as final as a judgment rendered after trial

b.      Comes at a different procedural posture

c.       Before trial – pretrial proceeding

d.      Relies upon documentary proof

                                                                                                                                       i.      Written proof

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Submitted to the court in written form

                                                                                                                                    iii.      No live testimony

e.       Why:

                                                                                                                                       i.      To shift the emphasis to pleading technicalities to deciding cases based on the merits

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Sometimes that discovery reveals that we don’t have a claim

f.        Purpose

                                                                                                                                       i.      To dispose of these cases that which the evidence in discovery reveals that there is no reason to have a jury

1.      So one sided that all reasonable persons would agree

2.      Trial would be a waste of genuine resources

3.      Rule 56C

a.       Appropriate when the documentary proof

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Documentary proof shows that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.      Interrogatories                         

                                                                                                                                                                                                            iii.      Documents

                                                                                                                                                                                                           iv.      Affidavits

                                                                                                                                                                                                             v.      Depositions

                                                                                                                                                                                                           vi.      Admissions

                                                                                                                                                                                                                           i.      Are pleadings proof

1.      No, unless they’ve been admitted

2.      Still can be relevant to summary judgment

2.      Pleadings help us to determine what is material

c.       Moving party will have to show how the pleadings can’t be maintained

d.      Affidavit

                                                                                                                                                   i.      Sworn statement taken under oath on penalty of perjury that takes the place of live testimony in the summary judgment context

                                                                                                                                                 ii.      Made on personal knowledge

                                                                                                                                                iii.      Contain facts that would be admissible into evidence

                                                                                                                                               iv.      And has to show that the affiant, the person making the affidavit is competent to testify

e.       No Genuine Issue of Material Facts…how?

                                                                                                                                                   i.      If the facts are undisputed

1.      are some situations when we need to decide if those facts have a legal effect

a.       ie: WTC one or two occurrences

                                                                                                                                                 ii.      Evidence is so one sided that all reasonable persons would agree

1.      same effect as motion for directed verdict

2.      Doesn’t allow the court to make credibility determinations

a.       That’s why we only have documents

                                                                                                                                                iii.      At some point, it can get so one sided that all reasonable persons could agree

1.      Videotape of someone running a red light

                                                                                                                                               iv.      Not a bright line

f.        What facts are Material

                                                                                                                                                   i.      May effect the outcome of the suit

g.       Hard for a P to win a full summary judgment

h.       Can’t get full summary judgment for pain and suffering or damages

g.       Burden of Proof

                                                                                                                                       i.      Burden of Production

1.      Provide enough evidence that a reasonable jury would find in your favor

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Burden of Persuasion

1.      Produce enough evidence to persuade that it is more likely then not

                                                                                                                                    iii.      When Movant Has Burden at Trial

1.      Must present documentary proof such that all reasonable persons would agree they met their burden of persuasion

                                                                                                                                   iv.      Non Moving Party has Burden

1.      Movant must show or point out that movant cannot meet its burden of production

h.       Partial Summary Judgment

                                                                                                                                       i.      Order saying in respect to a particular issue no reasonable person could differ

1.      Biff sues for negligence and strict liability

a.       No issue of material fact on SL

b.      Grant summary on SL

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Go to trial on negligence only

i.         Directed Verdict

                                                                                                                                       i.      Mirrors the summary judgment standard

VIII.         Trial

a.       Seventh Amendment

                                                               i.      Provides that in suits at common law where the value in controversy exceeds $20,the right of trial by jury shall be preserved

1.      Only applies to cases in Federal Court

a.       Most all states have provisions to jury trial

2.      Preserves the right to suits at common law

3.      How do we determine if it was available in 1791?

a.       Closest analogous action to the current claim in the 1700’s

b.      You have to see whether the remedy sought was legal or equitable in nature

b.      Equitable in Nature

                                                               i.      No jury trial

                                                             ii.      Injunctions, restraining orders, Courts of Equity

c.       Legal in Nature

                                                               i.      Jury trial

d.      When we have a particular issue that is relevant to both legal and equitable issues, it should be decided by the jury

                                                               i.      If the jury comes back and says that the equitable issue is reasonable, he can build upon the factual decision already made by the jury

                                                             ii.      Declaratory Judgment depends on the underlying facts

e.       Court

                                                               i.      Judge can override or usurp the jury’s factual considerations in certain cases

1.      No reasonable jury could have ever come to that conclusion

2.      Only one reasonable conclusion as to the judgment can be reached

                                                             ii.      Directed Verdict

1.      Only difference b/n this and summary judgment is the court has heard all the evidence on the claim

2.      When P moves must establish that all reasonable persons would agree that he met burden of persuasion

3.      In a situation where a p has the burden of production, the D can prevail if the P hasn’t met its burden of persuasion

4.      If you are in federal court, to preserve error for appeal on motion as a matter of law, you should make it at the close of all evidence

f.        Motion for a New Trial

                                                               i.      Asking for a do over

1.      Saying do it again with a new jury

                                                             ii.      Judge will do it when the jury’s verdict is patently and manifestly unjust 

1.      Bad jury charges

a.       Prejudicial evidence heard before the jury

b.      Mistrial if it happens during trial

                                                            iii.      Jury interprets the facts

1.      Both parties can agree on the facts

2.      Jury may be needed to determine the issue of the case

a.       Stout negligence

IX.              Finality of Judgments

a.       Preclusion Between the Same Parties

                                                               i.      Res Judicata

1.      Res Judicata (Claim Preclusion)

a.       A final judgment with an opportunity to litigate on the merits includes same parties or privies from relitigating the same claim

b.      Elements

                                                                                                                                       i.      Final judgment w/ opportunity to litigate on the merits

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Involves the same claim

1.      Interpreted broadly by Fed and TX courts

2.      Includes all cause of action that were raised or could have been raised arising out of the same transaction

3.      If no supplemental jurisdiction, would not be barred

4.      Logical Relation Test

5.      Provides a similar incentive for a P to include all claims that arise out of the same transaction or occurrence

                                                                                                                                    iii.      Same Parties or Privies

1.      Individual or entity so closely related to the litigation party that the litigating party that the litigation parts represents their interests

2.      Collateral Estoppel (Issue Preclusion)

a.       Decision on a litigated issue essential or necessary to the judgment precludes relitigation of that issue by the party that litigated and lost

                                                                                                                                       i.      Elements

1.      Same Issue

a.       Two competing policies

b.      Broader

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Does not require same parties

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.      Does not require same transaction

c.       Narrower

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      It applies to issues that were essential to the judgment

2.      Actually Litigated

a.       Issues must be decided based on conflicting assessments of both parties

b.      Cannot be based on a stipulation

3.      Determination is essential to the judgment or outcome

a.       Court must decide issue

b.      Must be a part of the holding of the case rather then mere dicta

c.       Policy

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Want to make sure it was rigorously considered

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.      Make sure litigating party had opportunity to appeal

4.      Party against when estopped must be fully represented

a.       Full and fair opportunity to litigate

b.      CE only applies to the party that litigated and lost

b.      Non Mutual Collateral Estoppel

                                                                                                                                       i.      Defensive

1.      Def is using CE as a shield to prevent O from relitigating issue P litigated and lost

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Offensive

1.      P uses CE as a sword to keep Def from relitigating issue that Def litigated and lost

2.      Policies

a.       Efficiency

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Encourage other P’s to wait rather then join the action

b.      Fairness

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      What if Def wins 25 of 26 cases is it fair to hold them to that one judgment

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.      Procedural opportunities not available before

                                                                                                                                                                                                            iii.      First case was for small amount so didn’t defend as rigorously

3.      Courts should use discretion

a.       Should not use if unfair or inefficient

3.      Policy

a.       Public Policy

                                                                                                                                       i.      Promotes judicial efficiency

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Must be an end to the litigation process

b.      Private Interest

                                                                                                                                       i.      Litigant not subject to suit over and over again

4.      Restatement of Judgment

a.       Alternative holding are only given preclusive effect if they are affirmed on appeal

b.      Fed and TX follow restatement

5.      Interstate Preclusion

a.       State v. State

b.      Article 4, Section 1 Full Faith and Credit Clause

                                                                                                                                       i.      Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public record, acts and judicial proceedings of every other state

                                                                                                                                     ii.      Example CA would apply TX Res Judicata Principles

1.      Must be a final judgment

2.      Opportunity to litigate on merits

3.      Court must have had jurisdiction

6.      Interjurisdictional Preclusion

a.       Decided in State Court First

                                                                                                                                       i.      Full Faith and Credit Statute

1.      Fed Ct must give at least as much preclusive effect to the judgment that the state court would give

b.      Decided in Fed Court First

                                                                                                                                       i.      Federal Common Law

1.      State court must give judgment same preclusive effect that the Fed Ct would give

a.       Fed Question Case

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Must have final judgment that gives opportunity to decide on merits with same claims and parties

b.      Diversity Case

                                                                                                                                                                                                               i.      Same preclusive effect that applies by the state where Fed Court sits

                                                                                                                                                                                                             ii.