California Bar Examination Civil Procedure (California & Federal) Syllabus

Civil Procedure (California & Federal) syllabus — full chapter and topic list

Expand any chapter to see its topics and sub-topics. This is the whole examinable outline for Civil Procedure (California & Federal) in California Bar Examination, not a summary of it.

1. 1

   Jurisdiction and Venue

   5 topics

   • Subject Matter Jurisdiction
     • Federal question jurisdiction and the well-pleaded complaint rule
     • Diversity jurisdiction, complete diversity, and amount in controversy
     • Supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1367
     • California unlimited, limited, and small claims civil jurisdiction
   • Personal Jurisdiction
     • Minimum contacts, purposeful availment, and fair play
     • General versus specific jurisdiction
     • California long-arm statute coextensive with due process
   • Venue and Forum Transfer
     • Federal venue and transfer under 1404 and 1406
     • California venue rules and motions to change venue
     • Forum non conveniens
   • Removal and Remand
   • Erie Doctrine and Choice of Law
2. 2

   Pleadings and Pretrial Motions

   5 topics

   • Complaint and Pleading Standards
     • Federal notice pleading and Twombly/Iqbal plausibility
     • California fact pleading and the ultimate facts standard
     • Verified pleadings and pleading on information and belief
   • Responsive Pleadings
     • Answer, affirmative defenses, and general versus specific denials
     • California demurrer (general and special)
     • Federal Rule 12(b) motions
     • Motion to strike
   • Amendments and Relation Back
   • Joinder of Claims and Parties
     • Permissive and compulsory counterclaims and cross-claims
     • Compulsory and permissive party joinder
     • Interpleader and intervention
   • Class Actions
3. 3

   Discovery

   5 topics

   • Scope of Discovery and Proportionality
   • Discovery Devices
     • Interrogatories and the California 35-question limit
     • Requests for production and inspection
     • Requests for admission
     • Depositions
   • Privileges and Work Product Protection
   • Expert Witness Disclosure
   • Discovery Sanctions and Motions to Compel
4. 4

   Resolution Without Trial and Trial Procedure

   6 topics

   • Summary Judgment and Summary Adjudication
     • Burden-shifting framework
     • California separate statement requirement
   • Voluntary and Involuntary Dismissal
   • Default and Default Judgment
   • Jury Trial Right and Jury Selection
   • Directed Verdict, JNOV, and Motion for New Trial
   • Provisional Remedies and Injunctions
5. 5

   Former Adjudication and Appeals

   5 topics

   • Claim Preclusion (Res Judicata)
   • Issue Preclusion (Collateral Estoppel)
     • Mutuality and nonmutual offensive/defensive use
     • California primary rights theory
   • Final Judgment Rule and Appealability
   • Standards of Appellate Review
   • Writ Review in California

Civil Procedure (California & Federal) flashcards for California Bar Examination

21 of 60 cards from the Civil Procedure (California & Federal) deck — real questions with worked answers.

1. What are the two main categories of federal subject matter jurisdiction, and can parties waive SMJ?

   Federal courts have SMJ through (1) federal question jurisdiction and (2) diversity jurisdiction. SMJ can never be waived or consented to and may be raised at any time, even on appeal; lack of SMJ is fatal to the case.

2. State the requirements for federal diversity jurisdiction.

   (1) Complete diversity: no plaintiff is a citizen of the same state as any defendant (measured at filing), and (2) the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 (exclusive of interest and costs).

3. How is the amount in controversy determined for diversity jurisdiction, including aggregation rules?

   Use the plaintiff's good-faith claim unless legally certain it cannot be met. A single plaintiff may aggregate all claims against a single defendant. Multiple plaintiffs or multiple defendants generally cannot aggregate unless enforcing a common undivided interest.

4. How is citizenship determined for individuals, corporations, and unincorporated associations in diversity cases?

   An individual is a citizen of their domicile (presence + intent to remain). A corporation is a citizen of every state of incorporation AND its principal place of business (nerve center). Partnerships/LLCs/unincorporated associations are citizens of every state of which any member is a citizen.

5. What is the federal-question 'well-pleaded complaint' rule?

   Federal question jurisdiction exists only if a federal issue appears on the face of the plaintiff's well-pleaded complaint. Anticipated federal defenses or federal counterclaims do not create federal question jurisdiction.

6. When does supplemental jurisdiction allow a federal court to hear claims lacking independent SMJ?

   Under 28 U.S.C. 1367, a court may hear claims that share a common nucleus of operative fact (same case or controversy). But in diversity-only cases, plaintiffs cannot use supplemental jurisdiction over claims by/against parties joined under Rules 14, 19, 20, or 24 if it would destroy complete diversity.

7. What is the constitutional foundation and two-step test for personal jurisdiction?

   PJ requires (1) a statutory basis (state long-arm statute) and (2) compliance with Due Process: the defendant must have minimum contacts with the forum such that jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.

8. Distinguish general (all-purpose) from specific personal jurisdiction.

   General jurisdiction allows any claim and exists where the defendant is 'at home' (individual's domicile; corporation's place of incorporation and principal place of business). Specific jurisdiction requires the claim to arise out of or relate to the defendant's purposeful contacts with the forum.

9. What are the key minimum-contacts factors for specific personal jurisdiction?

   (1) Purposeful availment of the forum's benefits (defendant's contacts must be deliberate, not random/fortuitous), (2) the claim must arise from or relate to those contacts (relatedness), and (3) the exercise must be reasonable/fair.

10. List the reasonableness ('fair play') factors a court weighs in personal jurisdiction analysis.

    (1) Burden on the defendant, (2) forum state's interest, (3) plaintiff's interest in convenient relief, (4) the interstate judicial system's interest in efficient resolution, and (5) shared interest of states in furthering social policies.

11. What are the traditional bases for personal jurisdiction that satisfy due process without minimum-contacts analysis?

    Voluntary presence (in-state personal service / 'tag' jurisdiction), domicile, consent (express, implied, or by appearance), and waiver.

12. State the general federal venue rule under 28 U.S.C. 1391.

    Venue is proper in (1) any district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same state, or (2) any district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred (or where property is located). If neither applies, a fallback provision applies.

13. Compare 28 U.S.C. 1404(a) transfer with 1406(a) transfer of venue.

    1404(a): venue is proper but transferred for convenience of parties/witnesses and interest of justice; the transferor's law generally follows the case. 1406(a): venue is improper; the court may dismiss or transfer to a proper district, and the transferee court's law applies.

14. What is forum non conveniens and how does it differ from a 1404 transfer?

    Forum non conveniens lets a court dismiss (not transfer) when a far more appropriate forum exists elsewhere, typically a foreign country or another judicial system, that the court cannot transfer to. A 1404 transfer moves the case to another federal district within the system.

15. What is the basic standard for removal of a case from state to federal court?

    A defendant may remove a case that could originally have been filed in federal court (federal question or diversity). Removal is to the federal district embracing the state court where the action is pending.

16. State the key procedural limits on removal (timing, unanimity, and the diversity in-state defendant rule).

    Notice of removal must be filed within 30 days of the first removable paper; all defendants must consent (unanimity rule). In diversity-only cases, removal is barred if any properly joined and served defendant is a citizen of the forum state (the 'forum defendant rule'). Diversity cases cannot be removed more than 1 year after commencement absent bad faith.

17. What is a motion to remand and the deadline for remand based on a procedural defect?

    A motion to remand returns the case to state court. Remand for a procedural defect (e.g., untimely or non-unanimous removal) must be sought within 30 days of removal. Remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction may be ordered at any time.

18. State the Erie doctrine.

    In diversity cases, a federal court applies federal procedural law but must apply the substantive law of the state in which it sits (including that state's choice-of-law rules under Klaxon). There is no general federal common law.

19. How does a federal court decide whether a law is 'substantive' under Erie when there is a Federal Rule on point versus when there is none?

    If a valid Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (or federal statute) is directly on point, it applies under the Rules Enabling Act / Hanna (so long as it is arguably procedural). If no federal rule is on point, the court uses the outcome-determinative test, weighing the twin aims of Erie (discouraging forum shopping and avoiding inequitable administration of law) and balancing state/federal interests.

20. What matters are treated as 'substantive' and thus governed by state law under Erie?

    Statutes of limitations, tolling rules, conflict/choice-of-law rules, elements of claims and defenses, standards for new trial based on excessive verdicts, and burdens of proof are generally substantive.

21. What is the federal pleading standard for a complaint after Twombly and Iqbal?

    Under Rule 8(a)(2) and Twombly/Iqbal, a complaint must contain enough factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. Legal conclusions are disregarded; the facts must allow a reasonable inference of liability beyond mere possibility.

See more Civil Procedure (California & Federal) flashcards →

Planning Civil Procedure (California & Federal) for California Bar Examination

Civil Procedure (California & Federal) (California Bar Examination) FAQ