Juris Doctor (JD) Civil Procedure Syllabus

Civil Procedure 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 in Juris Doctor (JD), not a summary of it.

1. 1

   Subject Matter Jurisdiction and the Federal Courts

   4 topics

   • Federal Question Jurisdiction
     • The well-pleaded complaint rule
     • Federal ingredient and the Grable substantial federal question doctrine
     • Arising-under jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331
   • Diversity Jurisdiction
     • Complete diversity rule (Strawbridge v. Curtiss)
     • Citizenship of individuals, corporations, and unincorporated associations
     • Amount-in-controversy requirement and aggregation
   • Supplemental Jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1367
     • Common nucleus of operative fact (Gibbs)
     • Limitations on supplemental jurisdiction in diversity cases
     • Discretionary declination of supplemental jurisdiction
   • Removal and Remand
     • Procedure and timing for removal
     • The forum-defendant rule
     • Remand for lack of jurisdiction or procedural defect
2. 2

   Personal Jurisdiction and Venue

   3 topics

   • Constitutional Limits on Personal Jurisdiction
     • Pennoyer to International Shoe: minimum contacts and fair play
     • General (all-purpose) versus specific jurisdiction
     • Purposeful availment and the stream of commerce (Asahi, McIntyre)
   • Long-Arm Statutes and Service of Process
     • State long-arm statutes and the constitutional ceiling
     • Service under Rule 4 and waiver of service
   • Venue, Transfer, and Forum Non Conveniens
     • Proper venue under 28 U.S.C. 1391
     • Transfer under 1404 and 1406
     • Forum non conveniens dismissal
3. 3

   The Erie Doctrine and Choice of Law

   3 topics

   • The Erie Doctrine
     • Swift v. Tyson and its overruling in Erie Railroad v. Tompkins
     • Substance versus procedure distinction
     • Outcome-determinative test and Byrd balancing
   • The Hanna Analysis
     • Direct collision with a Federal Rule and the Rules Enabling Act
     • Twin aims of Erie when no federal rule applies
   • Determining the Applicable State Law
     • Ascertaining state law and Erie guesses
     • Klaxon and the forum state's choice-of-law rules
4. 4

   Pleadings, Joinder, and Pretrial Practice

   5 topics

   • Pleading Standards
     • Notice pleading under Rule 8
     • Plausibility standard (Twombly and Iqbal)
     • Heightened pleading and Rule 9(b)
   • Responsive Pleadings and Motions
     • Rule 12(b) defenses and waiver
     • Amendments and relation back under Rule 15
   • Joinder of Claims and Parties
     • Counterclaims and cross-claims (Rule 13)
     • Permissive and compulsory joinder (Rules 19 and 20)
     • Impleader, interpleader, and intervention
   • Class Actions under Rule 23
     • Prerequisites: numerosity, commonality, typicality, adequacy
     • Types of class actions under 23(b)
     • Notice, certification, and settlement review
   • Discovery
     • Scope and proportionality under Rule 26
     • Discovery devices and mandatory disclosures
     • Privilege, work product, and sanctions
5. 5

   Adjudication and Preclusion

   4 topics

   • Resolution Without Trial
     • Summary judgment under Rule 56 (Celotex trilogy)
     • Voluntary and involuntary dismissal
     • Default judgment
   • Trial and Post-Trial Motions
     • Right to jury trial under the Seventh Amendment
     • Judgment as a matter of law (Rule 50)
     • New trial and relief from judgment (Rules 59 and 60)
   • Claim and Issue Preclusion
     • Res judicata: same claim, same parties, final judgment on the merits
     • Collateral estoppel and offensive/defensive use
     • Nonmutual preclusion (Parklane Hosiery)
   • Appellate Review
     • Final judgment rule and collateral order doctrine
     • Interlocutory appeals and standards of review

Civil Procedure flashcards for Juris Doctor (JD)

22 of 69 cards from the Civil Procedure deck — real questions with worked answers.

1. What is the statutory basis for federal question jurisdiction, and what is its core requirement?

   28 U.S.C. § 1331. Federal courts have jurisdiction over civil actions 'arising under' the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. There is no amount-in-controversy requirement.

2. State the 'well-pleaded complaint rule' for federal question jurisdiction.

   The federal question must appear on the face of the plaintiff's properly pleaded complaint as part of the plaintiff's own cause of action. Anticipated defenses or federal counterclaims do not create federal question jurisdiction (Mottley).

3. Under Grable, when does a state-law claim 'arise under' federal law?

   When a federal issue is (1) necessarily raised, (2) actually disputed, (3) substantial, and (4) capable of resolution in federal court without disrupting the federal-state balance Congress intended.

4. What are the two requirements for diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)?

   (1) Complete diversity of citizenship — no plaintiff may be a citizen of the same state as any defendant; and (2) the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000.

5. How is the citizenship of an individual determined for diversity purposes?

   By the person's domicile: the state where they are physically present AND intend to remain indefinitely. A person has only one domicile, which continues until a new one is established.

6. How is a corporation's citizenship determined for diversity jurisdiction?

   A corporation is a citizen of (1) every state and foreign state where it is incorporated, AND (2) the one state or foreign state where it has its principal place of business ('nerve center' — where high-level officers direct/control activities, per Hertz).

7. How is the citizenship of an LLC or partnership (unincorporated association) determined?

   It takes the citizenship of every one of its members/partners. Thus an LLC is a citizen of every state in which any member is a citizen.

8. What is the rule for measuring the amount in controversy, and when can it be defeated?

   The plaintiff's good-faith claim controls unless it appears to a legal certainty that the claim is for less than the jurisdictional amount. Interest and costs are excluded; the amount must exceed (not merely equal) $75,000.

9. What are the rules on aggregating claims to meet the amount in controversy?

   A single plaintiff may aggregate all claims (related or not) against a single defendant. Multiple plaintiffs generally cannot aggregate separate claims; aggregation across parties is allowed only for a single undivided/common interest.

10. What is supplemental jurisdiction and its statutory source?

    28 U.S.C. § 1367 lets a federal court hear additional claims lacking an independent jurisdictional basis if they form part of the same 'case or controversy' as a claim within original jurisdiction — i.e., they share a common nucleus of operative fact (Gibbs).

11. What does § 1367(b) restrict, and why?

    In cases founded SOLELY on diversity, it bars supplemental jurisdiction over claims by plaintiffs against persons joined under Rules 14, 19, 20, or 24 (and claims by Rule 19/24 plaintiffs) when doing so would destroy complete diversity. It preserves the complete-diversity requirement.

12. Under § 1367(c), when may a court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction (discretionary factors)?

    When (1) the claim raises a novel/complex issue of state law; (2) the state claim substantially predominates; (3) all original-jurisdiction claims have been dismissed; or (4) other compelling reasons exist.

13. In a diversity case, can a plaintiff use supplemental jurisdiction to add a co-plaintiff whose claim does not meet the $75,000 amount?

    Yes. Under Exxon Mobil v. Allapattah, if at least one plaintiff satisfies the amount in controversy, § 1367 allows supplemental jurisdiction over co-plaintiffs (joined under Rule 20) with related claims below the amount, as long as complete diversity is not destroyed.

14. What is the general removal statute and who may remove?

    28 U.S.C. § 1441. Only the defendant(s) may remove a civil action from state court to the federal district court embracing the state court, and only if the case could originally have been filed in federal court.

15. State the 'forum-defendant rule' for removal of diversity cases.

    Under § 1441(b)(2), a case removable only on diversity grounds may NOT be removed if any properly joined and served defendant is a citizen of the state in which the action was filed.

16. What are the procedural deadlines for removal under § 1446?

    A defendant must file the notice of removal within 30 days of receiving the initial pleading/summons. All defendants must consent (unanimity rule). For diversity cases, removal is barred more than 1 year after the action commenced (absent bad faith).

17. What is remand, and what is the procedure for challenging removal?

    Remand returns the case to state court. A motion to remand for any defect other than subject-matter jurisdiction must be made within 30 days of removal. Lack of subject-matter jurisdiction can be raised at any time, and the court may remand sua sponte.

18. Distinguish general (all-purpose) from specific (case-linked) personal jurisdiction.

    General jurisdiction allows any claim against a defendant 'at home' in the forum (regardless of where the claim arose). Specific jurisdiction allows only claims that arise out of or relate to the defendant's contacts with the forum.

19. Where is a corporation 'at home' for general personal jurisdiction?

    Under Goodyear and Daimler, essentially only its state of incorporation and its principal place of business — places where it is so continuous and systematic as to be essentially at home. (Substantial in-state business elsewhere is not enough.)

20. State the two-part constitutional test for specific personal jurisdiction.

    (1) Minimum contacts: the defendant must have purposefully availed itself of the forum such that being haled into court there is foreseeable, and the claim must arise out of/relate to those contacts; AND (2) exercise of jurisdiction must comport with fair play and substantial justice (reasonableness).

21. What are the 'reasonableness' (fairness) factors in specific personal jurisdiction (Asahi/World-Wide Volkswagen)?

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

22. What did International Shoe establish as the standard for personal jurisdiction?

    Due process requires that a defendant not present in the forum have 'minimum contacts' with it such that maintaining the suit does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.

See more Civil Procedure flashcards →

Planning Civil Procedure for Juris Doctor (JD)

Civil Procedure (Juris Doctor (JD)) FAQ