Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Civil Procedure - Coggle Diagram

- - - - option 1
        
        unilateral dismissal by filing notice any time before the D has filed an answer or MSJ
      - option 2
        
        Stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties (settlement)
      - option 3
        
        Permission of the court
        
        generally a court will grant permission to dismiss, but if D filled counterclaim the court will not unless that claim can remain
    - - P's ability to re-litigate depends on whether dismissal is w/ or w/o prejudice
        
        if the notice, stipulation, or court order specifies w/ or w/o prejudice, the P is bound by that
        
        if notice or stipulation is silent, the first dismissal is presumed to be w/o prejudice
        
        subsequent dismissals are presumed to be w/ prejudice
  - - - Operates as an adjudication on the merits (with prejudice) UNLESS:
        
        dismissal order states otherwise; or
        
        a dismissal for lack of jx, improper V, of failure to join a party under Rule 19
  - - - Clerk must enter a default
  - - - Waived if not raised in FIRST MOTION (or filed first, aswer)
        
        PJ
        
        Improper V
        
        Insufficient Process
        
        Insufficient Service of Process
      - Waived if not raised before trial ends
        
        Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted
        
        Failure to join an indispensable party
    - - Subject Matter Jurisdiction
  - - - Step 1:
        
        Assess only the arguments advanced by the movant - have they shown that the non-movant lacks sufficient facts and/or law to prevail on the claim/defense in Q? Two-ways
        
        Point out - w/ citations to the record - holes in the opposing party's claim or defenses; OR
        
        Adducing new evidence to demonstrate that the claim or defense cannot be proven
      - Step 2:
        
        examine the non-movants evidence. Has non-movant brought evidence sufficient for a reasonable jury to find in their favor
        
        Court will only look at non-movant's evidence (won't weigh it against the moving party's) and assume the witnesses are truth tellers - no credibility issues.
        
        if non-movant does not produce evidence, but just talks pleadings, they'll lose, but if the pleadings are under oath, they will count as evidence
    - - Motion for SJ must be made any-time before 30 days after close of discovery
- - - - Must contain three items
        
        statements of facts that are sufficient to show that P is entitled to relief
        
        Demands for Judgment and the relief sought
        
        Ground for subject-matter jx
    - - A party can amend a pleading 1 time as a matter of right
        
        complaint can be amended w/in 21 days of serving the original complaint
        
        A party can amend an answer w/in 21 days of serving the original answer
      - A party can amend w/ permission
        
        permission of opposing parties - then can amend
        
        permission of court - will consider reason for delay and prejudice (usually granted)
    - - whether amendment is filed w/in SoL depends on whether the amendment seeks to add a new claim or new party
        
        Added new claims:
        
        the amendment is considered filed on date that original complaint was filed IF new claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence as existing claim (relation back rule)
        
        Added new parties:
        
        will relate back to original filing date if:
        
        (1) the new claim arises from same transaction and occurrence as the existing claim;
        
        (2) If new party knew of the suit soon enough to not be prejudiced (generally during the time permitted for service of the original complaint); AND
        
        (3) if the new party should have expected to be named, but-for a mistake in identity
  - - - Must serve both complaint + summons, if not, service is not proper
      - must be served w/in 90 days of filing complaint
        
        if P fails to serve in 90 days - court dismisses suit w/o prejudice
        
        If P show good cause reason - court will grant additional time
      - Anyone at least 18 years old and not a party can serve process
        
        Note: this rule avoids fights or even killings between people engaged in litigation
      - How can process be served?
        
        option 1: manner prescribed by court in the state where:
        
        fed suit has been filed; or
        
        where D will be served
        
        option 2: manner specified in Rule 4
        
        Deliver process to D (through 3rd P)
        
        Leave at D's usual abode w/ person of suitable age and discretions residing there
        
        Serve the D's registered agent; OR
        
        Mail with a letter requesting the D waive in-person service
        
        If D waives they become responsible for cost of personal service & they get 60 days to respond
        
        If D is a corporation, partnership, or association
        
        Deliver process to an Officer;
        
        Deliver Process to a managing agent or general agent; OR
        
        Deliver Process to any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to recieve service
        
        if law requires service by mail, ,it must be by hand and mail
        
        Service and PJ
        
        Service of process activates the court's authority to assert PJ
        
        If a court has the power to assert PJ over a party, that power becomes active the moment D is served w/ process (or a waived and filed w/ said court)
        
        Service and Due Process
        
        D is entitled to notice of claims against them AND opportunity to respond to them
        
        Notice through service: if served, basically have notice
        
        Key is whether service is reasonably calculated to inform D of the action against them
        
        Notice W/O Service: May be constitutional issue
        
        Key is whether P took steps reasonably calculated to inform the D of action against them
        
        New Claims Filed during the Lawsuit
        
        Service of process necessary when a new party has been added to the lawsuit
        
        without service of process courts PJ over party will not activate
        
        For counterclaims, cross-claims and other claims against current parties, service of process is unnecessary
  - - - no limit to how many, but common defenses are SoL, SoF, and assumption of risk
      - Waiver - if defense is not included in the answer, generally it is forfeited
        
        EXC:
        
        Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be sought
        
        Failure to join a necessary party; AND
        
        Lack of SMJ
    - - for each allegation, the D should specifically admit or deny. If D fails to deny it is deemed admitted
    - - Court will order a pleading to be clarified if so vague the responding party cannot reasonably prepare a response
    - - The court can (on its own or on motion) order material stricken if the complaint/answer contains redundant, immaterial, or scandalous stuff
    - - Seek dismissal, can be filed by any D party
    - - Initial Response (answer/pre-answer motion):
        
        if D was actually served w/ process - 21 days to respond
        
        If service waived - 60 days to respond
      - If D responds w/ one of the above motions (MTDS, MTS, MTD) and is denied
        
        D must file an answer w/in 14 day
  - - - An atty/unrepresented party certifies, after making reasonable inquiry, the submission of docs is based on:
        
        good facts
        
        submission based on evidentiary support or, specifically noted that evidence after discovery will support
        
        applies to affirmative representations of facts and denials of allegations
        
        good law
        
        submission is warranted by law or a non-frivolous argument for a change in existing law
        
        good faith
        
        submission is not for any improper purpose (harass, delay, increase cost of litigation)
    - - How:
        
        complaining party must first draft a motion for sanctions and serve it on the offending party
        
        Safe Harbor: motion file 21 days after service - allows chance to withdraw/modify any alleged violation of rule 11
      - Nature:
        
        Goal - deter misconduct
        
        Court may order monetary sanctions
      - Who is Subject to Sanctions
        
        anyone violating 11
        
        exc: represented parties are not subject to money damaged for violating "good law" requirements
        
        Atty's firm must be held jointly liable, absent exceptional circumstances
    - - rule 11 sanctions do not apply to any discovery matter - misconduct has discovery-specific rules
- - - - nature of the remedy - right to jury monetary relief, rather than injunctive relief, is sought
        
        if seeking both, right to jury exists for any issue underlying a damages claim - even if the issue relates to injunction
      - nature of claim - courts assess whethe claim can be fairly analogized to 1791 common law claim
        
        However, the nature of the remedy is generally the primary inquiry
    - - Any party may excercize the right
        
        i.e. if 10 parties, only 1 must want it
      - the demand must be filed w/in14 days after the last pleading is filed
        
        NOTE: pleading must be eligible for jury trial
      - party exercising the right must file and serve on other parties a written demand for jury trial
      - if demand is untimely the right is forfeited
    - - size 6-12 members
        
        must start w/ at least six, but parties can agree to end trial w/ less
      - selection (voir dire)
        
        Challenge for Cause:
        
        parties have unlimited challenges for cause, but must articulate the nature of the juror's unfitness
        
        Peremptory Challenge:
        
        Parties have 3, - juror is automatically dismissed - no justitfication needed
        
        UNLESS: strike giving rise to gender/race discrimination, the striking party must provide a NONDISCRIMINATORY explanation
        
        if not the strike is rescinded
    - - Before deliberation judge instructs the jury on the law applicable to the claims alleged
      - A party May
        
        Propose particular instruction NO LATER THAN the close of all evidence
        
        Object to any instruction
        
        Must be done BEFORE jury begin deliberation
        
        Unless - parties are informed of jury instructions before given to jury, a party must object before closing arguments
    - - General Verdict: a statement that P wins or D wins
      - Unless parties stipulate otherwise, jury verdict must be unanimous
      - Special Verdict: the court may direct a jury to answer Qs of fact
      - General Verdict w/ Specific Questions:
        
        court may order jury to return a general verdict ("is D liable to P?"), but also answer specific questions ("was D impaired while driving?")
        
        If the verdict and answers to the questions are inconsistent, the judge can:
        
        order a new trial;
        
        order the jury to re-deliberate; or
        
        enter the verdict appropriate to the specific answers
  - - - during trial, if a party has been fully heard on an issue, AND court determines the party lacks sufficient evidence to prevail on a particular claim:
        
        the court can enter judgement on that claim w/o entering judgment on other claims
  - - - The party against whom judgement is entered has been fully heard on the issue, AND
      - The party lacks sufficient evidence to prevail on an issue necessary to a claim/defense
        
        same as summary judgment - the court assumes the non-movant's witnesses are all truth tellers and do not weigh the evidence
        
        Court will view evidence in light most favorable to the moving party
  - - - If a party filed a losing JMOL during trial, and then loses at trail, they can try again
      - motion must be filed w/in 28 days of entry of judgment
      - in ruling on a renewd motion for JMOL, the court may
        
        allow the verdict to stand;
        
        enter the opposite verdict;
        
        order a new trial (even if a motion for a new trial wasn't made)
    - - Against the great weight of the evidence
        
        The court can take into account the comparative volume and credibility of evidence
      - Excessive damages
        
        The jury returns a verdict that is "grossly excessive" or "shocks the conscience"
        
        alternatively, the court can choose an appropriate amount, and let P decide between the courts amount and a new trial
      - Procedural error or misconduct
        
        ONLY IF:
        
        error or misconduct likely affected the result of trail, and
        
        the party objected to the error when it had the opportunity to do so
      - Newly discovered evidence
        
        When a party discovers new evidence after verdict, that it could not have discovered w/ reasonable diligence before the verdict A NEW TRAIL IS WARRANTED IF:
        
        New evidence is not solely to impeach, AND would likely change the result
      - Must file w/in 28 days
    - - Must be made w/in reasonable time
        
        promptly after learning of the grounds
        
        First 3 grounds (mistake, new evidence, fraud), must be made w/in 1 year
      - Asks court to undo judgement, set it aside
        
        Request must be based of one of 6 possible grounds
        
        Mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect;
        
        P sues D. D fails to respond and P obtains a default judgment against D. D learned of the judgment and asks the court for relief because D was in a coma for the last two months
        
        Newly Discovered Evidence;
        
        same analysis as motion for a new trial
        
        Fraud, Misrepresentation, or misconduct by a party;
        
        If party withholds key evidence during discovery, bribes a witness, or makes false statement's to court or other parties
        
        Judgement is void;
        
        Court lacked SMJ or PJ
        
        Judgment has been satisfied;
        
        If party has satisfied judgement entered against it, the party may seek to have the judgement discharged so that it is no longer under the supervision of the court
        
        often sought in injunction cases
        
        Any other reason that justifies relief (catch-all)
        
        Can't be used when any of the above apply
    - - Remitter
        
        asks judge to lower an unreasonable award of damages
      - Additur
        
        additur is unconstitutional in federal court
- - - - fed courts empowered to hear claims presenting a question of federal law - fed const., statutes, and treaties
      - Well pleaded compliant rule
        
        fed Q must arise in P's affirmative claim, regardless of any defense D might raise
      - Fed Q inside state law claims
        
        a court can assert jurisdiction over a state law claim that raises a federal issue if the FQ is:
        
        Necessarily raised;
        
        Actually disputed;
        
        Substantial; and
        
        Most important element
        
        Capable of resolution in fed court w/o disrupting the fed-state balance approved by congress
    - - Fed courts have Jx over citizens of diff states where the AiC is greater than $75,000.00
        
        Diversity of citizenship MUST be complete
        
        Rule: No P and no D are citizens of the same state
        
        EXC:
        
        Class actions of more than 100 people and $5M
        
        Diversity measured at the time the suit is filed, but amended complaints that add or dismiss can affect diversity
        
        Determining Citizenship
        
        People
        
        Wanderer Rule: person's citizenship does not change UNTIL person plants roots in a new state by residing there and intending to remain indefinitely
        
        Domicile: People are citizens of one place at a time: the state where they currently are and demonstrate intent to remain indefinitely
        
        Corporations - Two places
        
        Principal Place of Business (PPB) - nerve center, where the officers of the company meet; and
        
        State of incorporation
        
        Unincorporated associations
        
        citizens of every state where a member resides
        
        AiC -must exceed 75 K
        
        court will defer P's allegation of financial injury, unless it appears "to a legal certainty" to be incorrect
        
        P does not have to actually recover over 75K, they just need to plead appropriate amount in good-faith
        
        Aggregation of Claims
        
        P can bring as many claims as they have against one single D - to get to AiC
        
        Note: joint and several liability - if D1 and D2 owe P 50k in J/S liability, this fails to meet AiC
    - - Allows a claim falling outside FQ or Diversity Jx to "piggyback" onto a claim that DOES fall w/in either (Anchor Claim)
        
        If not, there is no supplemental Jx. If Yes, advance to step 2
      - Step 1 - determine relatedness
        
        does claim 2 (piggyback claim) arise from the same transaction/occurrence as the one with FQ or Diversity (Anchor claim)
        
        Y - go to step 2
        
        N - no jx
      - Step 2 - What is the Anchor Claims basis for SMJ, and is P a Sneaky P
        
        Sneaky P: is a P who is trying to circumvent the limitations on Diversity Jx - no Supplemental Jx
        
        If P brings another complaint under FRCP:
        
        19
        
        compulsory joinder
        
        20
        
        permissive joinder
        
        24
        
        intervention
        
        14
        
        impleader
        
        Exc - multiple P's - Stacked P's may have supplemental Jx based on a Diversity Anchor
        
        If D impleads a 3rd P, claiming the other 3PD must indemnify D Fed Court has supplemental jx and the domicile of the 3PD is irrelevant
        
        is the Claim FQ? - if yes, advance to step 3
      - Step 3 - Consider state prerogatives
        
        steps 1 and 2 are satisfied, but is there a good reason for the court to decline to exercise jx anyway?
        
        Y - court may decline: possible reasons
        
        involving novel or complex issue of state law;
        
        Claim "substantially dominates" over FQ or diversity;
        
        Anchor claim was dismissed; OR
        
        Other compelling reasons
    - - A D can remove a case FROM STATE TO FED Court if it could have been originally filed there
        
        Home-State Defendant Rule - D cannot remove to fed court if:
        
        SMJ would be grounded only on Diverstiy Jx: AND
        
        D may always remove a Fed Q regardless of where it is filed
        
        D is a citizen of the state where P originally filed suit in state court
        
        Multiple Defendants - where there are multiple Ds, all the Ds must agree to remove
        
        Timing - D must remove w/in 30 days of when the grounds for removal become apparent
        
        But, if removal based on Diversity Jx, D must remove w/in 1 year of filing (unless P attempting to thwart removal)
        
        If multiple Ds then time starts when final D is served
        
        Note: removal only takes you to a fed court in the state where state claim was filed in
    - - Fed courts do not hear probate or family law cases
  - - - Y - fed court can assert PJ (subject to constitutional consideration)
      - N - State court cannot, fed court cannot assert PJ either
    - - State law is const if it authorizes PJ in one of five circumstances: "PJ Rarely Causes Severe Mental Anguish"
        
        R - Residency
        
        Humans - reside in the state they live
        
        Corp. - resident of state of incorporation, and PPB
        
        Other entities are residents of inc and PPB too
        
        C - Consent or Waiver
        
        A party can consent to PJ in three ways
        
        Contract
        
        D signed a K with a choice-of-forum clause = consent
        
        Appointment
        
        Some states require businesses to appoint agents located in the state to receive process = consent
        
        Courts are split on whether this is sufficient basis for PJ
        
        Rule 12 Motion
        
        A party appears in court w/o objecting to PJ (must object to PJ in initial filing)
        
        S - Service
        
        Human D is served w/ process while in the state where the suit was filed (tag jx)
        
        not const. if the P coaxed the D into the state under false pretenses OR D was in state to participate in a difference legal proceeding
        
        Tag jx is not met, when there is deceit
        
        M - Minimum Contacts (Three-Part Test):
        
        (1) The D establishes minimum contact with forum state;
        
        established if D causes harm in the state, does business, or has an interest in real property in the state (must be purposefully established)
        
        (2) Claim against the D arise from that contact; And
        
        A lawsuit "arises from" the D's contacts if the contacts played a role in causing the lawsuit
        
        (3) PJx won't offend traditional notions of Fair Play & Substantial Justice
        
        FP&SJ factors:
        
        burden on the D
        
        forum state interests
        
        P's interest in obtaining relief
        
        interstate judicial system's interest in efficient resolution of controversies
        
        shared interests of states in furthering fundamental social policies
        
        A - "At Home" General Jx
        
        VERY HIGH BAR TO CLEAR
        
        parties as subject to "at home" (general jx) where contacts are so substantial they are "essentially at home"
  - - - Venue is appropriate where all D's reside, as long as all D's reside in the same state
        
        residencey: if all D's reside in same state = district where any single D resides
        
        Human D's reside where they live
        
        All other Ds reside in every district in which they are subject to PJ
    - - Venue is also appropriate where the thing or most of it occurred Or where a substantial part of the property is situated
        
        If multiple Ds from different states - proper venue will always be the location of harm
        
        If P can also lay venue in the district
    - - Transferring is always a maybe - can move case between fed courts, but not state or foreign courts
        
        Convienience
        
        (Commonly used)
        
        if the case could have been filed there initially and transfer is necessary for the convenience of the parties and/or witnesses
        
        Agreement
        
        if all parties join the request to transfer, court does not need to consider PJ or venue (if they agree they are consenting)
        
        Interest of Justice
        
        If the case was filed in an improper venue, the court can dismiss the case or in the interest of justice, transfer it where it could have been initially filed
      - Forum non conveniens
        
        if most convenient forum is outside the US, the court cannot transfer the case - BUT it can dismiss it w/o prejudice so P can refile in proper country
        
        Difficult balancing tests considering Public and Private interest
        
        Public Interest Include:
        
        (1) resolving disputes locally and not burdening local courts with distant disputes;
        
        (2) avoiding application of foreign law, if the case will require applying the law of another jurisdiction; and
        
        (3) avoiding imposing jury duty on the potential jurors’ whose community is unaffected by the case
        
        Private Interests Include:
        
        (a) ease of access to evidence;
        
        (b) cost of witness attendance at trial;
        
        (c) availability of compulsory process; and
        
        (d) any other factors that might lessen the time and expense of trial.
    - - If no district supports V, then the district any D would be subject to PJ
- - - - gotta appeal to the circuit court the district court sits
    - - fed circuit court jx is limited, can hear only appeals seeking review of:
        
        Final judgment rule:
        
        when a final judgment has been entered, there is nothing left for the court or parties to address, and you can appeal
        
        thus if something remains, you can't appeal yet
        
        Final judgement def ~ judgement that one that disposes of all issues as to all of the parties and disposes of the entire case
        
        EXC:
        
        Oder pertaining to preliminary injunctive relief;
        
        can immediately appeal a district court order granting/denying a preliminary injunction
        
        Order Pertaining to certification of class
        
        any party may immediately appeal district court granting/denying a motion to certify a class in a putative class action suit
        
        Order that has been certified by the district and appellate courts for appeal
        
        May immediately appeal an order that has been certified IF:
        
        order involves a controlling Q of Law;
        
        issue of law is one with a substantial difference of opinion; AND
        
        immediate appeal will materially advance ultimate resolution of the action
        
        Collateral order Doctrine
        
        extremely narrow - allowed when 3 conditions are met:
        
        order pertains to a matter unrelated to the merits (collateral)
        
        Order conclusively decides a particular issue; AND
        
        Delaying appeal until a final judgment has issued would effectively deny appellate review of the issue
    - - Standard of Review
        
        Questions of Law:
        
        reviewed by de novo standard
        
        Mistake of Fact:
        
        when an appellant claims judge or jury error of fact
        
        reviewed by clearly erroneous standard
        
        meaning, appellate reverse/remand only if the lower court made a clearly erroneous mistake of fact - RARE
        
        Inherently Discretionary Questions:
        
        The abuse of discretion standard applies
      - Harmless Error rule:
        
        may affirm if there was an error, but did not affect the result
      - Waiver:
        
        a party can seek relief on appeal IF it failed to challenge the decision at the time the lower court made it
    - - appellant must file notice of appeal w/in 30 days on the judgement (or w/in 30 days of the order that is subject of the appeal)
        
        Exc: where appeal is on class certification, the party only has 14 days
      - If post-trail motion is filed, and then denied, the 30-day window to appeal starts anew at the later denial
  - - - Elements
        
        Same Parties or those in privity with same parties
        
        (i.e. can't sue employee on negligence, lose, then sue employer asserting same claim and facts)
        
        Same Transaction/Occurance
        
        Valid Final judgement on the Merits
      - Relationship to Compulsory Counterclaim Rule:
  - - - Elements
        
        issue must have been litigated and determined in the prior suit
        
        issue must have been essential to the judgements;
        
        essential = if decided the opposite way it would have changed the result of the case
        
        The prior suit must have ended in a judgment on the merits; AND
        
        the party against whom preclusion is asserted must have had a full and fair opportunity, as well as incentive, to litigate the issue in the first suit
    - - special verdicts are very helpful to parties asserting issue preclusion because they explicitly define the issue, how it was decided, and (often) its essential to the judgement
    - - (i.e. P is on a bus. The bus crashes. P sues the bus driver for negligence, and his employer for vicarious liability. P wins the suit on the merits.)
        
        courts are more skeptical - of automatic wins - will not enforce against D if D likely would have defended more vigorously had D known
        
        If P's friend who was also on the bus, D would be precluded from asserting the defenses they did in the initial trail (offensive issue preclusion)
    - - raised in defense to a claim - the usual version
- - - - P legal claim is plausible and will likely win if litigated
    - - to P if PI is not granted
    - - Whether the harm to P is greater if PI is denied, than harm to D if it is granted
    - - Court will not issue PI that is injurious to public interest; AND
    - - P must deposit enough money w/ court to compensate the D for any losses if P loses
  - - - TRO expires 14 days after issuance - they can be extended for 14 days upon good cause shown
      - TRO can be ex parte (w/o notice) If:
        
        specific facts clearly show that immediate injury, loss, or damage will result before adverse party can be heard in opposition; AND
        
        the movant's attorney certifies in writing any efforts made to give notice and the reasons why it should not be required
- - - - Court just applies text of fed law and any authoritative precedent
    - - In cases in which a state law claim depends on a question of federal law, the court applies the state law to the state law issues, and fed law to fed law
    - - Fed common law is a body of precedent repeatedly applied and molded by the courts - this body of law is generally confined to the following field of law:
        
        Maritime law
        
        Foreign relations
        
        Commercial rights and liabilities of Fed Gov
        
        Property rights and liabilities of fed gov't
      - Erie doctrine did away with most this - these are what remains
        
        Erie Doctrine
        
        fed court hearing a state law claim in a case based on diversity of supplemental jx must apply SUBSTANTIVE law of the state in which it sits
  - - - Step 1: Do what congress or the const says if it is Valid and on point
        
        Validity - fed statute must be valid
        
        FRCP - every one deemed valid
        
        Const - is valid per se
        
        If fed statute is invalid - court ignores it and moves to step 2
        
        On point: ultimately a question of interpretation
      - Step 2: If there is not fed statute of const. law on point, do what would avoid unfairness and forum shopping
        
        If there is no valid statute or const. law on point, fed court should follow its ordinary practices (whether case law, written policy, informal practice, or simple habit) UNLESS doing so would lead to:
        
        Forum shopping: a preference for one court system (state or federal) over another; or
        
        fundamental unfairness
- - - - Suing someone back
        
        Permissive Counterclaims: claim doesn't come out of the same transaction/occurrence as the reason you are being sued
        
        Note: P counterclaim must be supported by SMJ
        
        Compulsory Counterclaim: you must counter sue any claim you have against opposing party based on the same transaction/occurrence or D forfeits claim
        
        Note: C counterclaims can come in either through SMJ OR though Supplemental Jx
    - - Not against person who sued you
        
        CCCC - co-D can counterclaim a cross-claim
        
        D suing other D must be related to initial claim
    - - D brings a claim against a person not already a party
        
        must allege that 3rd P is responsible for some/all liability
        
        Two kinds: contribution (claim against joint tortfeasor), indemnity (claim against insurer).
        
        A D has a right to implead w/in 14 days of serving an answer
        
        After being impleaded, 3rd P made party may bring their own claims against other and implead others - original P can also file a claim against 3rd P D related to original claim
    - - Multiple Ps can join one or multiple Ds can be sued in one suit, as long as:
        
        joined party claim relief (if P) or face liability (if D) that arises out of the same transaction or occurrence; AND
        
        there will arise in the action questions of law/fact common to joined party
    - - Could be forced to add a party to a suit
        
        Step 1: is the absent party necessary?
        
        Necessary party = has an interest that might be impaired if left out; complete relief cannot be issued in the party's absence; or if current parties would be subject to inconsistent/duplicative liability
        
        Step 2: if a missing party is necessary, can the party be joined, without issue?
        
        If Y - court should join them, adjudicate case, skip step 3 (you're done - this is rare)
        
        If N - Proceed to step 3
        
        A missing party can't be joined in fed court IF the court lacks PJ over the missing party, or adding the party would destroy SMJ by destroying diversity
        
        Step 3: if party cannot be joined are they indispensable?
        
        court will consider: extent of prejudice to missing party; if prejudice can be lessened by shaping the relief in a certain way; and if the case is dismissed, if P can find relief in another forum
        
        If Y - must dismiss the suit
        
        If N - court can adjudicate the case in the party's absence
      - Defense tactic
    - - One person (the rep) can litigate on behalf of a group (class) if:
        
        A class can be formed, and
        
        The action brought is proper for resolution via class action
      - To form a class - must meet 4 reqs:
        
        Numerosity
        
        So many claimants that joinder is impractical;
        
        Commonality
        
        Questions of law or fact common to the class:
        
        Typicality
        
        Claims are typical of class members, ensuring the representative will have incentive to litigate in ways to protect the class; AND
        
        Representativeness
        
        Representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of class action
      - Proper for Resolution Via class action if:
        
        separate actions would create risk of inconsistent judgment or judgments would impair nonparties from protecting their interests
        
        opposing party has acted in ways generally applicable to the class (not likely to work if seeking $$)
        
        Court finds that common Q of law or fact predominate over individualized Qs, and a class action is superior to other methods for a fair efficient result
      - Additional Considerations
        
        Court must had PJ over every D and over the named P
        
        Judgment binds all class members unless they opt out
        
        Notice; in common-question class actions, class members must be given notice of the pendency of the suit, usually through mail or publication
        
        SMJ - when alleging a state law violation, the class can appear in federal court only if the D and representative P (not all members)are completely divers
        
        If class is over 100 members seeking damages over $5M, diversity if any single member is diverse from any D (
        
        Jurisdiction can be established if FINISH LATER
    - - Have the other 2 guys sue each other
        
        used when a party fears it will face multiple/inconsistent liabilities
        
        if a party feels it will be subject to multiple or inconsistent liability, it can file an interpleader claim and let the would-be claimants litigate amongst themselves.
    - - Non-party is interested, but has not been joined
        
        intervention of right - a party MUST be permitted to intervene when:
        
        the party claims an interest related to subject matter of the action, and
        
        w/o intervention, there is a risk that they might not be able to protect that interest
        
        Permissive Intervention - upon timely application and at the court's discretion, a party may intervene w/ a claim or defense that shares w/ the main action a common Q of L/F
  - - - Bulge Rule: an impleaded D will be subject to the personal jurisdiction of a fed court if, in addition to any other ground for PJ, the impleaded D is served w/ process w/in 100 miles of the courthouse where the suit is pending
- - - - Rule 26(f) requires parties to meet and idscuss the likely content of discovery in the case and draft a discovery plan
      - the plan must be submitted w/in 14 days of the conference
      - the conference must be held 21 days before Rule 16(b) conference
    - - anfter
  - - - Initial disclosures
        
        Witnesses - name/contact info of any witness that a party may use to support a claim or defense;
        
        Documents - copies (or descriptions) of documents, electronically stored info (ESI), and tangible objects that a party may use to support its claim or defense;
      - Expert disclosures
      - Pretrial Disclosures
    - - Scope of Discovery - Really Want Private Phenomenal Evidence
        
        Relevance
        
        Work Product (WP)
        
        Privilege
        
        Proportionality
        
        Experts
    - - Interrogatories (Rule 33)
        
        up to 25 questions
        
        can seek facts or contentions
        
        30 days to respond, must be in writing and objections stated with specificity
      - Request for Admission
        
        requiest to admit truth or fact
        
        if admitted, it's in there foe the trial
        
        30 days to respond, may admit, deny, or state they have made a reasonable to ascertain the truth but lack information to admit/deny
      - Requests for production
      - Request for Mental or Physical Examination (Rule 35)
        
        Used when party's mental or physical state is at issue
        
        availability only upon court order
      - Depositions (Rule 27. 30. 31):
        
        used to ask questions of witnesses
        
        May depose 10 witnesses, but can get a court order for more
        
        most depos cannot conduct until after Rule 26(f) conference - can sometimes occur
        
        a party who wants to depose a person by oral Qs must give written notice to all parties
        
        Each party is entitled to attend any deposition and ask Q's on cross-exam
      - Subpoena
        
        discovery form non-parties
        
        subpoenas de
    - - What to do when you don't get what tou asked for
        
        If they sort of comply
        
        Motion to compel:
        
        Sanctions: