Civil Procedure Mnemonics & Memory Aids

All four prerequisites must be met before a court will certify a class action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a).

• Numerosity — the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable
• Commonality — there are questions of law or fact common to the class (Wal-Mart v. Dukes — must show common contention capable of classwide resolution)
• Typicality — the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the class
• Adequacy — the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class

The framework for analyzing whether a court has specific personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant (International Shoe and its progeny).

• Minimum contacts — defendant must have purposefully directed activities at the forum state
• Intentional availment — defendant purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities in the forum
• Nexus — the claim must arise out of or relate to the defendant's contacts with the forum
• Comports with fair play and substantial justice — considering burden on defendant, forum state's interest, plaintiff's interest, judicial efficiency, shared interests of the states

The four ways a case can end up in federal court. Subject-matter jurisdiction cannot be waived and can be raised at any time.

• Diversity jurisdiction — complete diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 (28 USC 1332)
• Original federal question — claim arises under federal law (28 USC 1331, well-pleaded complaint rule)
• Removal — defendant removes from state court to federal court when original federal jurisdiction exists (28 USC 1441)
• Federal supplemental jurisdiction — claims so related to the federal claim they form part of the same case or controversy (28 USC 1367)

Three-step framework for determining whether federal or state law applies in a federal diversity case.

• Step 1: Is there a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure directly on point? If yes, apply it if it is valid under the Rules Enabling Act (Hanna v. Plumer)
• Step 2: Is there a federal statute on point? If yes, apply it if constitutional
• Step 3: If no FRCP or federal statute, apply the Erie/Guaranty Trust outcome-determinative test — would applying federal law lead to forum shopping or inequitable administration of the laws?

The modern federal pleading standard after Bell Atlantic v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal replaced the old Conley notice-pleading standard.

• Factual allegations — complaint must contain factual allegations, not just legal conclusions
• Accepted as true — court accepts well-pleaded factual allegations as true (but not legal conclusions)
• Claims must be plausible on their face — more than merely conceivable
• Entitled to relief — factual content must allow the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable

The standard for granting summary judgment. The court does not weigh evidence or assess credibility.

• Genuine dispute — there must be a genuine dispute as to a material fact
• No credibility determinations — the court views evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party
• On the record — based on depositions, affidavits, interrogatories, admissions, and other discovery materials
• Material fact — the disputed fact must affect the outcome of the suit under the governing substantive law
• Entitled to judgment as a matter of law — moving party shows no reasonable jury could find for the non-movant

Claim preclusion bars relitigation of a claim that was or could have been raised in a prior action between the same parties.

• Final judgment on the merits in the prior action
• Identity of claims — same transaction or occurrence (transactional test)
• Same parties (or those in privity with them)
• Tried in a court of competent jurisdiction

The five main discovery tools available under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

• Depositions — oral or written examination of a witness under oath (Rules 30, 31)
• Requests for production of documents and things (Rule 34)
• Interrogatories — written questions to a party (Rule 33, limit of 25)
• Physical and mental examinations — court order required, only when condition is in controversy (Rule 35)
• Requests for admission — requests to admit the truth of matters (Rule 36)

Interpleader allows a stakeholder to join competing claimants in a single action. Two types exist: statutory (28 USC 1335) and rule (FRCP 22).

• Stakeholder — party holding a fund or property subject to competing claims
• Competing claims — two or more claimants assert rights to the same property or fund
• Adequate stake — stakeholder deposits the property/fund with the court
• Relief from multiple liability — stakeholder seeks protection from inconsistent obligations

Proper venue under 28 USC 1391(b) in federal court. Venue is a waivable defense (unlike subject-matter jurisdiction).

• Residence — any district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same state
• Events — a district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred
• Default — if no other district is available, any district where any defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction

Key joinder rules that determine which claims and parties can be brought into a single action.

• Impleader — third-party practice, defendant brings in a party who may be liable for all or part of the claim (Rule 14)
• Transaction or occurrence — permissive joinder requires claims arising from same T/O and common question (Rule 20)
• Counterclaim — compulsory (same T/O, must raise or waive) or permissive (different T/O) (Rule 13)
• Crossclaim — against a co-party, must arise from same T/O as original claim (Rule 13(g))