Mixed
This 1938 case held that federal courts sitting in diversity must apply state substantive law and federal procedural law
What is Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins?
What is FRCP 23(a)(1)-(a)(4)
1. Numerosity
-Greater than 40 satisfies the requirement
2. Commonality
-What are the common law or facts
-Do they have a common legal question
3. Typicality
-Are the claims going to be the same among the "class"
-Different kinds of claims do NOT have typicality
4. Representativeness
-does the class representative have the same interest in resolving the suit as the rest of the class
Whats Q1 and Q2 to start of the analysis?
Q1: Is the state law substantive?
Q2:Is there a pertinent FRCP or procedural statute arguably on point?
3 types of "persons required to be joined if feasible" under Rule 19?
1. If, in person’s absence, complete relief cannot be accorded amongthe existing parties (FRCP 19(a)(1)(A))
2. If a person claims an interest relating to the subject ofthe action and disposition of the action in the person’s absence may impair orimpede the person’s ability to protect that interest (FRCP19(a)(1)(B)(i)).
3. If a person claims an interest relating to the subject of the action in the person’s absence would leave existing parties subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple or inconsistent obligations (FRCP 19(a)(1)(B)(ii)).
A forum selection clause specifies this in a contract.
What is the court or location where disputes will be litigated?
True or False?
There is a need to reconcile conflicts between federal and state law when the underlying claim is based on federal law.
False. The Erie doctrine is inapplicable to claims or issues created and governed by federal law.
There is NO need to reconcile conflicts between federal and state law when the underlying claim is based on federal law.
What is 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) ?
Covers the issue of whether a case may be transferred from one federal district to another. It is constitutional, because the transfer of actions between federal district courts is a procedural concern.
According to Hanna v. Plumer, if there’s a direct conflict between a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure and state law, the court should apply this if it’s valid under the Rules Enabling Act.
What is the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure?
Why might joinder not be feasible?
1. No PJ
2. NO SMJ
3. Venue is improper
If you file in one venue and it's proper, you can transfer for the convenience of parties under 1404 and the law..
goes with it
State law requires service of process to be completed within 60 days or the suit is dismissed. Federal Rule 4(m) allows 90 days. Under Hanna v. Plumer, which time limit controls?
What is the Federal Rule (90 days)?
🧠 Reason: Direct conflict between valid Federal Rule and state law → federal rule governs if it’s procedural and valid under the Rules Enabling Act.
What is the difference between FRCP 19 and FRCP 20?
FRCP 19- Compulsory Joinder
FRCP 20- Permissive Joinder
The Erie doctrine aims to prevent these two problems that existed under Swift v. Tyson.
What are forum shopping and inequitable administration of the laws?
What does FRCP 20 state?
Permissive Joinder, FRCP 20
a.Person may join as either a plaintiff(FRCP 20(a)(1)) or defendant(FRCP20(a)(2)).
b.Requirements:
i.They assert a right or a right is asserted against them that is “arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences,”and
ii.Common question of law or fact
If you are transferring because venue is improper (1406), then the law ...
does NOT go with it.
3 Types of Class Action
1.23(b)(1)(A) (incompatible obligations) and 23(b)(2) (injunctive and declaratory relief)
•Relief sought is indivisible; relief to one is relief to all; proceeding separately wouldleave the defendant subject to inconsistent obligations
2.23(b)(1)(B) (limited fund)
•Actions that are concerned with avoiding prejudice that could result if multipleindividual actions were maintained instead
•Defendant does not have enough money to pay everyone, so if plaintiffs can litigateseparately, then first to the courthouse gets everything, later comers get nothing
3.23(b)(3) (damages)
•Seeking financial compensation
Two additional prerequisites under FRCP 23(b)(3)
Damages Class Actions
1.Questions of law or fact common must "predominate”over questions affecting only individuals. Predominance ask whether common questions are more prevalent or important than the non-common ones
2.Class action has to be a superior method for adjudicating the case
This 1965 case refined Erie by holding that if a federal rule is arguably procedural and valid under the Rules Enabling Act, it should govern—even if it changes the outcome.
What is Hanna v. Plumer?
Is we have multiple class actions in different states, what would we use to get them under one jurisdiction?
MDL
If venue is improper, then the court can:
i.Grant the 12(b)(3) motion, or
ii.Grant the §1406 motion.
What do we use when the class action device is unavailable?
What is Joinder. Potentially Joinder, subject to rule 19
passenger on bus driving through State A was severely injured when the buscrashed after the driver of the bus fell asleep.The passenger initiated a state lawtort action against the driver and the bus company in State A state court, seekingdamages for medical expenses and pain and suffering.The passenger allegedthat the driver and bus company were liable for recklessness in light of the longshifts and limited opportunities for sleep given to the driver.The bus companypromptly removed the case to State A federal court.State A law provides that in personal injury cases where recklessness orintentional wrongdoing is established, the prevailing claimant is entitled to anaward of attorney’s fees.Title 28 U.S.C.§1920 is a federal statute that coverstaxation of costs but it omits any reference to attorney’s fees; no other federalstatute generally provides for the award of attorney’s fees to all victors in federalcourt.Must the federal court apply the State A attorney’s fees provision in theevent that the passenger is able to prove recklessness and prevail in this action?
A. No, because Rule 11 permits the award of “reasonable attorney’s fees” only as compensation for parties that prevail on Rule 11motions.
B.No, because the federal statute on taxation of costs, 28 U.S.C.§1920, omits attorney’s fees from the costs that a court may award, and the statute is constitutional.
C.Yes, because the case was removed from State A state court.
D.Yes, because there is no Federal Rule or statute addressing attorney’s fees in this context and ignoring the State A law would result in forum shopping and inequitable administration of the law.
D. Yes, because there is no Federal Rule or statute addressing attorney’s fees in this context and ignoring the State A law would result in forum shopping and inequitable administration of the law.
What are the twin aims of the Rules Decision Act Analysis?
1. Would application of federal law yield forum shopping?
2. Would application of federal law result in an inequitable administration of the law?
The State A promoter of a sporting event had a contract with ABC Clothing (aState B corporation) to supply all the shirts for people staffing the event.However, the promoter subsequently signed another agreement with a competitor of the clothing company, XYZ Clothing (a State A corporation), to supply shirts instead.ABC initiated an action in federal court against the promoter for breach of contract, seeking to enjoin the promoter from proceeding under the contract with XYZ and requesting specific performance of its original agreement with ABC.The promoter filed a motion to dismiss for failure to join XYZ as a required party defendant in the action. How should the court rule on the motion?
a.Deny it, because XYZ’s presence in the action would destroy complete diversity, making its joinder not feasible.
b.Deny it, because the dispute between the promoter and ABC can be resolved completely without the presence of XYZ and no other grounds for requiring the joinder of XYZ exist.
c.Grant it, because if XYZ is not joined in the action, XYZ may later file a claim against the promoter, thereby subjecting the promoter to a substantial risk of incurring inconsistent obligations.
d.Grant it, because XYZ’s interest in supplying shirts for the event will be impaired by a resolution of the dispute between ABC and the promoter.
b.Deny it, because the dispute between the promoter and ABC can be resolved completely without the presence of XYZ and no other grounds for requiring the joinder of XYZ exist.
In general, a defendant wishing to enforce the forum-selection clause may make one of the three procedural moves: Name all three
1.Make a 12(b)(3) motion to dismiss the case for improper venue;
2.Make a motion to transfer the case pursuant to §1406, which empowers the federal court to transfer the case when venue is improper; or
3.Make a motion to transfer the case pursuant to §1404