DUEPROCESS

I) DUEPROCESS

PROVIDESBASICRIGHTSTOINDIVIDUALS
o Equality:nomatterhowguiltyapersonisthoughttobe,thatpersonisstilldeservingofdue
process
o PersonalDignity
o Meaningfulparticipationinthejudicialprocess/judicialdecisionmaking
o SubstantiveRightsSubstantiverightsmeannothingwithoutafairprocedureprotectingyouas
anindividualfromtakingthemaway

DUEPROCESSPROCEDURE
o 2componentsofafairprocedurerulesaredesignedtoachieve:
Needtoknowwheretheaccusationiscomingfrom,needtoknowthechargenotice
Opportunitytopresentyoursideopportunitytobeheard
o Notice:tellstheaccused:
Whattheydid
Howacertaincodewasviolatedandwhatistheprovision
Whoisthepersonaccusingthem
Whenandwheretheviolationoccurred
o Pleading:allowsparties:
Tosubmitdocumentsthatwillinitiallyframealawsuit
submitsthecomplaint
submitsananswer
canreplywithnewinformation
o Discovery:allowsforthesubmissionof:
Anyevidencepertinenttothecase
o Representation:expertwhoknowstherulesofthecode/violation
o DecisionMaker:neutralunbiasedfactfinder:
Jury
Judge
o Confrontation:backandforthbetweentheparties
o Appeal:optionifdonotagreewithjudgmentrendered:
Needarecordforanappeal
Appellatecourtsimplylooksattherecord
o Therulesofcivilprocedureweredesignedtoensureaspeedy,justandinexpensivetrialfor
everyone
exantebeforetrialhappens
expostaftertrialhappens
o Dueprocesscause(s)arelocatedin2placesintheConstitution;therefore,citizensaredoubly
protected
5thAmendmentrelatestofederalgovernmentnofederalgovernmentshalldeprivea
personoflife,liberty,orpropertywithoutdueprocessoflaw

1
 14thAmendmentrelatestothestategovernmentnostateshalldepriveapersonoflife,
liberty,orpropertywithoutdueprocessoflaw

o HanmdivRumsfeld
Law:DueprocessguaranteesthatUnitedStatescitizensheldintheUnitedStatesas
enemycombatantsmustbegivenameaningfulopportunitytocontestthefactualbasisfor
thatdetentionbeforeaneutraldecisionmaker.
Facts:AUScitizenwasdetainedfor3years,deprivedofliberty,andnotchargedafter
beingcaughtandlabeledasanenemycombatant.Claimiswritofhabeascorpus
(collateralattackcomesthroughtheside),allegingthewasheldwithoutaccessto
legalcouncilornoticeofanychargespending.(allbasedoffMobbsDeclaration)
Issue:IsaUScitizenwhoisanenemycombatantalloweddueprocessandan
opportunitytocontestthefactualbasisbeforeaneutraldecisionmaker?
Holding:Yes.Citizenshouldhavetherighttoameaningfulopportunitytobeheardwith
noticestatingwhyheisacombatantandfactualbasisonwhichtheclassificationwas
made.Theprocedureissomewherebetweennothingandalloftherights.(Suggestedthat
courtscanincludehearsay,theispresumedguilty,burdenofproofonthe,etc).
DetaineesinGuantanamohaverights(notcitizens).
Reasoning:

MATHEWSTEST
o Methodusedtodeterminewhatproceduresshouldbeaffordedtodetaineestodispute
theirclassificationasenemycombatants.
privateinterestaffectedbythegovernmentsactions(deprivedofliberty)v.
thegovernmentsinterest(nationalsecurity)
Functionsinvolved:beingabletocarryoutwar
Burdensthegovernmentfaces:cripplesthewareffort
Balancethetwo
Risksoferroneousdeprivationoftheprivateinterestiftheprocesswere
reducedandtheprobablevalue,ifany,ofadditionalorsubstitutesafeguards
Dissent(Thomas):notwithinjudiciarybranchtodecideifheisanenemycombatant,
itstheexecutivebranch.Posesapoliticalquestion.TheMathewstestdoesnotapply
here.Thegovernmentinterestsoutweighallprivateinterests.
Dissent(Scalia):theshouldbeaffordedallprotections,disagreeswithMathews
Originalismoriginalpublicmeaning,interpretwordsaswhattheymeanwhen
theywerewrittenv.textualist
themajorityismakingupanewprocessthatiscompletelysubjective,andun
warrantfromanyotherwriting
thisrulinggivesmorepowertothejudicialbranch,nodemocraticprocess
CaseImportance:setsouttheprocedureforthegovernmenttofollow.Thegovernment
isrequiredtorenderdueprocessinstateactions.Standardsandrulesofdueprocess:
Dueprocessisastandard(notarule)
Anytimearuleiscreated,itwillgeneratealotofexceptions;otherwiserigid
applicationwillbringaboutabsurdresults.
Standardsareopentoalotmoreinterpretation
Rulesaredefiniteandclear,buttheyleadtolotsofexceptions
2
 Standardsgivemoreflexibility,buttheyleadtoalotofexpostbecauseeveryone
isgoingtoargueonwhatthestandardis

II) NOTICEANDTHEOPPORTUNITYTOBEHEARD
o Notice
Withoutpropernotice,youcannothaveameaningfulopportunitytocounter(answerthe
allegations)
Dueprocessiscontingentuponadequatenotice,whichallowstheaccusedtoknowthe
matteragainstthem.
NoticeisfoundfromconstitutionalstandardandRule4.
Noticemustbetimelyandadequate(likelytoreachthepersonaffected).
Processfornoticethatanactionispendingagainstyou
Firstthereisacomplaint:Setsforththeactuallegalbasisforwhichaclaimisagainst
you
Second,thereisasummons:Tellingyouwhereandwhentoappear
Ruleisthatfairnoticemustbegiven.
o ServiceofProcess
Typicallytakesformofcomplaintandsummons
Complaintsetsforthelegalandfactualclaimsagainstthe
Summonsistheinformationabouttheproceedings
Doesntjusttellthattheyarebeingsued,tellswhytheyarebeingsued
Actualnoticev.Constructivenotice
Actualhanddeliveringtosomeone(nodoubtsomeonegotit)Constitutional
Standarddoesnotrequireactualnotice
Constructivedeemedtohavereceivednoticeduetostepstakentogivenotice

MULANESTANDARD(CONSTIUTIONALSTANDARD)

o Greenev.Lindsey
Law:ServiceofprocessmustcomplywiththeminimumstandardsoftheDueProcess
Clausebyusingamethodthatisreasonablycalculatedtoprovidethepartieswithnotice
oftheproceedings.
Facts:servedbypostingtheformonallthedoorsaftertakingthestepstonotify
tenants(whichisokaybyKYStatute).Thesaytheyneversawthesummonsanddidnt
knowaboutevictionproceedingandtheiropportunitytoappealrelapsed;thereforethe
statutedoesnotprovideforadequatenotice.Kidshavepreviouslytakendownpapers
crucialtothiscase.
Issue:Doespostingonthedoorofabuilding,pursuanttothestatue,satisfythe
constitutionalstandardofdueprocess?KYRuleandConstitutionalrightsareatplay
Holding:No.Adequatenoticeoftheproceedingagainstbeforeissuingfinalnoticeof
evictionwasnotprovided.Evictingthewasnotconstitutional
MerelypostingwasnotadequatenoticeinthecircumstancesofTHIScase,
postingcanbeconstitutionalinothercaseswherethefactsaredifferent
Noticebymailisnotburdensome
3
 Thedidnothavedueprocessbecausetherewasnotpropernoticegiventorebut
theclaims
Reasoning:
MULANESTANDARD:constitutionalminimumstandardcourtcomesupwith
todetermineadequatenoticenoticereasonablycalculatedunderallthe
circumstancestoappriseinterestedpartiesofthependencyoftheactionand
affordthemanopportunitytopresenttheirobjectives
o TESTReasonablenessofthenoticeprovidedmustbetestedwith
referencetotheexistenceoffeasibleandcustomaryalternativesand
supplementstotheformofnoticechosen
Dissent:Nofactualjustification,howdoyouknowmailhasreliability?Rulingbasedon
speculationthatmailisconstitutionallybetter.
CaseImportance:
Casewhereobedienceofstatutoryrequirementsdoesnotsatisfytheconstitutional
requirementsforadequatenotice(InMullanesometimesnewspaperadsarenot
reasonable).Mustlookatmethodsandwhattheviablealternativesare
Generally,postingasufficientformofnotice,buthavetolookatthe
circumstancesandinthiscase:Noticebypostingondoorisnotsufficient;notice
bymailismoreadequate.
Xandymayalwaysbeenadequateforgivingnotice;thereforeyouhavea
reasonableexpectationtheywillbereasonableinthiscase;however,thecourts
aresayingitverymuchdependsonthefactsofthecase

o Jonesv.Flowers
Law:Whenastateisattemptingtoserveacitizenwithprocess,itmusttakereasonable
stepstoservethenoticeifservicebymailisineffective.
Facts:Jonesneglectedtopaypropertytaxesonahousehemovedoutof.Noticeofhis
delinquencywassenttothisaddressbycertifiedmail.Noonewashomeandnoone
cametothepostofficetoretrievetheletterinthenext15days.Itwasreturnedas
unclaimed.Noticeofthepublicinnewspaperaswell,andnooncameforward.Another
letterwassentandeventuallyreturnedunclaimed,sopropertywassold.Theclaims
thatthenoticeattemptswereconstitutionallydeficientunderMullane
Issue:Inthiscase,doesisthemailandnewspaperaddsatisfytheconstitutionalstandard
ofdueprocess?
Holding:No.Whiledueprocessdoesnotrequireapropertyownerreceiveactualnotice
beforethegovernmentmaytakehisproperty,whengovernmentlearnsitschosenmethod
ofnoticehasfailed,Mullanerequiresadditionalsteps.Certifiedmailwasnotsufficientin
thiscircumstance,althoughitwasokayinGreene.
Courtsaysnotsufficientnoticebecauseyoumustfollowup
Likeothercasesinwhichyoumusttakeintoaccountthecircumstances.
Atwhatpointisitareasonablycalculationofnotification?
o Calculatebeforeyounotify
o Calculateexante(whenthenoticeissent)notexpost
CaseImportance:givesgreaterclarificationforgivingadequatenotice
Greenesaysthatnoticebypostingondoorisnotadequatebutnoticebycertifiedmail
is.CaseappliestheMullanestandard,whichlookstoeachindividualcircumstance.
4
 JonesdisagreeswithGreeneandsaysthatnoticebycertifiedmailisnotsufficientif
donotdeterminethatitstherightresidence

5
 RULE4:NOTICE
Rule4setsouthowtogiveconstitutionalnotice
Inhandistheoldfashionwayandstillpopular,Mailisalsoanacceptablemeansof
noticeinsomecases.

o Khashoggi
Law:UnderFed.R.Civ.Pro4(e)(2)(B),serviceisproperatthepartysusualplaceof
abodeorresidence.
Facts:hasdwellingsallovertheworld,andclaimshismainresidenceisinSaudi
Arabia;thereforeserviceisonlyproperthere.ServicewasissuedtohisNYapartment
andwashandedtohishousekeeper.Hefailedtoappearincourt.
Issue:UnderRule4,isNYapartmentadwellinghouseorusualplaceofabode"?To
determineifitis,itmustbeconsiderediftheresidencehassufficientindiciaor
permanence.
Holding:Yes.Serviceisvalidalthoughhelivesthereonly30daysoutoftheyear.The
endoftheopinionstatesthatweexpressnoopinionuponthevalidityoftheservicehad
KhashogginotbeenactuallylivingattheOlympicTowerapartmentwhenservicewas
effectedLimitingthecourtsholding
Reasoning:Thecourtconsidered:ownedtheapt,itwaslistedforhisbailapplication,
itwasstaffed,hespent$furnishingtheapt,andmostimportantinthiscasewasliving
thereatthetimeofserviceandnoticeisproperwhenislivingtherewhenserved.If
theydidnotallowservice,hasdifferenthousesandwouldmovearoundalotthisisnot
hisnormalresidence.Thenevergetstocourt,thereforewillnevergethisdayincourt
andthepurposeofrulesistoprovidefairnessvindicationofrightsthroughtrial,if
interpretaruleinawaythatdestroysthefairnessofdueprocess,badinterpretation
CaseImportance:Toknowifonesresidenceistheirdwellinghouseorusualplaceof
abode(toensuresufficientnotice),looktoseeifresidencehassufficientindicia
permanence.
o ServingProcessAbroad:Rule4(f)
Rule4(f):Anindividualotherthanaminor,incompetentpersonorperson,whofiledfor
awaiver,maybeservedataplaceoutsidetheU.S.
HagueConvention:setsupcentralizedauthorityineachcountrytoallowprocessfor
foreignindividuals.ThetreatyisanagreementbetweenforeigncountryandtheU.S.
Withouttreaty,willhaveU.S.exertedpowerinaforeigncountry
Nodilutionofanyonessovereignty,becauseeveryoneagreeduponit
ImpracticalifthistreatywasnotsetupbecauseU.S.orthecountrywouldhavetoknow
theruleofprocessforothercountries

o MidContinentWoodProductsv.Harris
Law:Inordertobeproperandenforceable,serviceofprocessmustcomplywiththe
requirementssetforthinFed.R.Civ.Pro.4
Facts:,Harris,purchasedlumberfrom,andfailedtomakepayments.claimsthatit
hadadifficulttimelocatingandservinghimwithcomplaintandsummons.
attemptedtogivenoticeseveraltimes:U.S.Marshall,CertifiedMailatemployment,
privateperson(twice),postingondoor,andattorneysentletterhisattorney;butclaims
thathewasnotgivenpropernotice.
6
 Issue:Canadistrictcourtformulateitsowntesttodetermineifaisproperlyformed?
Holding:No.ServiceisonlyproperwhenitcomplieswithRule4.
Reasoning:Theextenttowhichthetriedtoserveprocessshouldnotbeafactor.Rule
4isonlysatisfiedwhentheissuccessfulinservingthecomplaintandsummons.The
factthattheattorneyknewisnotenough.Allowingthedistrictcourttheabilityto
formulateitsowntestwillundermineRule4andthewholepointoftheRulewasto
avoidlitigation,andifitisallowedtobechangedtherewillbemorelitigation.
CaseImportance:courtscannotcreatetheirownrulesandexceptionstorulestosatisfy
noticerequirementassetoutinRule4.Diligentattemptstoservenoticearenotthesame
asapersonreceivingsuccessfulnotice.DoestheConstitutiondemandthatyoufollow
rule4?No,thereisadifferencebetweentheruleandthestandard.Mullaneisthe
standard,attheveryleastyouhavetomeetMullane,butRule4givesautomaticmeeting
ofthestandard
o TimeLimitforService:Rule4(m)
Rule4(m)saysthatifaisnotservedwithin120daysafterthecomplaintisfiled,the
courtmustdismisstheactionagainsttheororderthatservicebemadewithina
specifiedtime.
Iftheshowsgoodcauseforthefailure,thecourtmustextendthetimeforserviceforan
appropriateperiod.

o Wymanv.Newhouse
Law:Ajudgmentobtainedthroughfraudinonejurisdictionisvoid,andwillnotbe
enforceableinanotherjurisdiction
Facts:livedinNewYorkandcametoFloridabecauseclaimedthathermotherwas
dying(and<3).WhengotoffplaneinFloridahewasmetbyadeputyofficerwho
servedhimwithprocessinasuit.didnotgototrialanddefaultjudgmentwasentered
for.reliesonFull,FaithandCreditClauseofConstitution.
Issue:Isserviceobtainedthroughfraudvalid?
Holding:No.Ifobtainedthroughfraudtheserviceisimproper,unenforceable,andvoid.
Reasoning:FullFaithandCreditClause:Article4ofConstitutionsaysthatfull,faith
andcreditshouldbegivenineachstatetothepublicacts,recordsorjudicialproceedings
ofeveryotherstate.(Basicallyitmeansthatstateshavetoenforcesisterstatejudgments.
AppellantcanbringalawsuitinFloridawithoutservinghimprocessinFlorida).The
enteredintojurisdictionbyfraud.
Page23ProblemCaseFactPattern:TheElusiveDefendant
o Rule4
Mailedsummonsmissingcomplaint
Faxingsummons(allofthem)missingcomplaint
Sentemailgreetingwithmessageyourebeingsuednosummonsor
complaint
wascurrentlyintowndidsheliveincondo?dwellinghouseor
normalplaceofabode(Khashoggi)

7
 o Rule4dwellinghouseusualplaceofabode
Khashoggisufficientindiciaofpermanence;whohasmultiplehomes
andtravelsfrequently
hasputmoneyintoit;hasastaff;etc.
AnalogoustoKhashoggi,buttherearedifferences,becausewedont
knowifwaslivingthereatthetimetheprocesswasservedand
Khashoggiexpresslylimitedtheholdingtothefactthathewascurrently
livingintheresidenceatthetimeoftheserving
ButthecourtleftKhashoggiopinionopentoargumentandallowingthe
toescapeliabilityistheoppositeofwhatthelawisaimingtodo
WhatifshewaslivinginSwitzerland?
o HituptheCentralAuthority
shousekeeperwashanddeliveredpapersservermustbeatleast16yearsofage
couldbeokayifitsvalidatedbyahearing
Servedattorneyisheappointedasanagentfortheinthiscase?
ThebirthdaycakepapersUNDERthecake?Didsheknowthepaperswerethereis
itfraudulenttodressupandgiveherthepapers
*Advicedontmesswiththelaw,thebestargumenttomakeisonthefactanalogize
anddistinctcaseswell

III) WHATKINDOFHEARINGDOESDUEPROCESSREQUIRE?

o Lassiterv.DepartmentofSocialServices
Law:TheDueProcessClauseoftheFourteenthAmendmentdoesnotmandatethatindigent
partiesbeassignedcounselinparentalrightsproceedings
Facts:DepartmentofSocialServicespetitionedtoterminateLassitersparentalrights.She
didnothaveanattorneytorepresenther.Shewasalsochargedwithmurderandhadan
attorneyforthatcase,buthewasnevertoldaboutthetermination.Courtdecidedshehad
ampletimetogetone,butLassiterclaimedthatdueprocessrequiredtheStatetoappoint
counselforherbecauseshewasindigent.
Issue:DoesDueProcesscallfortheappointmentofcounselforindigentparents(Due
ProcessclaimbecausetheSTATEismovingtotakeherrighttobeaparentaway,under14th
amendment)
Holding:No.StateSupremeCourtagreedthatdueprocessdidnotrequirestateappointed
counselforparentalterminationproceedings.
Reasoning:DueProcessClauseprotectionsstrongestwhenpersonalfreedomatstake.State
sharesinterestwithparentinterminationproceedings.
MATTHEWSTEST
o PrivateInterest:Lassitersrelationshipwithherchildrighttoparent(courtsaysits
astrong,commandingissue)
o GovernmentsInterest:welfareofchild,efficiency(notsignificantenoughto
overcomeprivateinterests,costofcouncil),reachingaccurateandjustdecisions(1st
andforemost,statedoesntwanttodepriveparentsfromtheirchildren)
o RiskofErroneousDeprivation:becauseparentisnotrepresentedbycounseland
proceedingsmaybecomplicatedsmall,elaborateproceduresinplace(willtheybe
straightforwardsothatcounselisnotneeded)

8
 Dissent(Blackmun):Statehadunfairadvantage.Casebycaseanalysis,howdoesthecourt
knowalawyerwouldnothavebeenhelpful.ThisproceedingisnotlikeScarpelli.Isthe
proceedingadversarial?TrialnottheinformalofScarpelli.Attorneycouldhavemade
defensesandchallengedthestate.
CaseImportance:Casedeterminedthatunlessapersonisbeingdeprivedofapersonal
liberty(likegoingtojail)thenyoudonotgetalawyer.Courtlooksatthetypeofmother
shewastoaffirmtheirdecision.Buttherewereseveralthingsthatshecouldhaveuseda
lawyerfor:
Socialworkerpresentedhearsay(lawyerwouldhaveobjected)
SocialworkerpresentsrecordandLassiterdidnthaveaccesstoit
Stateisusingalawyer;ifnotsoadversarialdonotneedone
Grandmotherstestimonyisinconflictwithstates
Lassiterwasinjail,thatswhyshedidntgettoseeson(courtneverbroughtthatup)
ScarpelliAnalysis:
Eldridge(MathewsTest)factorswillnotalwaysbesodistributedandsincedueprocess
isnotsorigidastorequirethatthesignificantinterestsininformality,flexibility,and
economymustalwaysbesacrificedGagnonvScarpelliStateonlyrequiredtocouncil
whenyourpersonallibertyisatstakecouldarguethatyourparentalrightsarejust
importanteventhoughyoudonthavetheoptionofgoingtojailarguethatthisrulewas
notmeanttoaddonanewelement,theyweresimplyattemptingtoaffordcouncilto
thosewithoutanattorneybutallcaseshappenedtobedealingwithpersonalliberty
o CourtisanalogizingwithScarpelliasinScarpelli,XYZ,sincehereasinthatcase,
XYZ,wedecide__
o Majorityisanalogizing
o Dissentisdistinguishingtakesthemajoritydownbysayingitisnothinglikethe
Scarpellicase
o AmericanRuleonAttorneyFeesandContingencies
TheAmericanRule:eachpartypaysitsownattorney(defaultrule).Thetheorybehindthis
isthatlawisuncertainanddonotwanttopunishpeopleforbringingclaimsthatmighthave
merit.Also,ifforcedtopayotherspartysattorneyitwoulddiscouragepoorpeoplefrom
bringingclaims.Andifloserhastopayothersattorneysfeewillbecomeinefficient(more
litigationwillariseoverwhatthefeeshouldbe).
ContingencyFee:lawyerwins;lawyergetsapercentageofwhatclientrecovers.
Thisisagoodideabecause:
o Lawyerwillhaveavestedinterestinthecase;iftheywintheygetmoney.
o Alsopeoplewhodonothavemoneycanhaveaccesstogoodlawyers.
Butitisabadideabecause:
o Lawyerswillbeoverlyaggressivenowthattheyhaveavestedinterest
o Lawyersmighttrytosettlealloftheirclaimssotheywillnothavetowork.

o Waltersv.NationalAssociationofRadiationSurvivors
Law:AstatuteprovidingthatattorneysfeesinVAbenefitawardsproceedingsmustnot
exceed$10doesnotviolateveteransrighttodueprocess.
Facts:Congresscreatedstatuteforthatcreatedthisadministrativesystemforgranting
serviceconnectedwithdeathanddisabilitybenefitsforveterans.Claimsaremadeby
submissiontolocalveteransagency,thentoaboardwhoviewsclaim.Setsupa$10
9
 maximumfeethatcanbepaidtoanattorneyifusedtorefuteclaimsthatweredenied.is
objectingtoethefeelimitationsbysayingitdeniedrealisticopportunitytoobtainlegal
representationandviolatedtheDueProcessClause5thAmendment,andfreedomof
expressionunder1st.Processisnonadversarial.
Issue:ShouldVeteranshavetheabilitytoobtainlegalcouncil(morethan$10)when
presentingclaimtoVA(doesitviolateDueProcessClause
Holding:No.Limitonfeeisnotunconstitutional.thatrighthasnotbeenviolated,because
thebenefitprocessisdesignedtobecollaborativeandinformal,notadversarialor
sophisticated,givingveteransflexibilityinhowtheypresenttheirclaimsbyreadingthe
evidenceinthelightmostfavorabletotheclaimant.
Reasoning:MATHEWSTEST
VeteransInterest:inreceivingbenefitswassignificantinthatmayrecipientsare
disabledandtotallyorprimarilydependentonbenefitsfortheirsupport
GovernmentsInterest:isthatsystemofadministeringbenefitsshouldbemanagedina
sufficientlyinformalway(noattorneys)thatthereshouldbenoneedfortheemployment
foranattorneytoobtainbenefitstowhichaclaimantwasentitled
Cost/benefitanalysiswillingtoacceptsomemistakes,butwantmostpeopletogetmost
$$quickest.
Dissent:noreasontobelieveagencyscostofadministrationwouldincrease,otherwaysto
addressit.Factthatlawyerservicesareunnecessaryinmostcasesdoesnotjustifytotal
prohibitionontheirparticipation.
ChallengingtheStatuaryScheme:inthewaytheygetthebenefitsasbeing
unconstitutional
Facialchallenge
o Justlookatthestatuteandsaythatitsunconstitutional
o Becausethedistrictcourtfindsitsunconstitutionalitenteredanationwide
preliminaryinjunctionbarringappellantfromenforcingthefeelimitation.Finds
thattheriskoferrorishigherandtheywillemorelikelytobedenied$$,used
Mathewstesttodeterminethattheveteransinterests>govntinterest
Process
o noformalstatuteoflimitations
o noresjudicate(thingadjudged)
o oncesomethinghasbeenadjudgeditwontberevisited.Inthiscasethey
canbringtheclaimagainiftheypresentnewfacts
o highdegreeofinformality
o theclaimantcanappealfromratingboardtoboardofveteransappeals,butthenit
cantgotothecourt,youaredone(nodirectappealprocess)
o exparteinnature
o youcanbringaclaimwithotherclaimantsandyoucanuseveteransorgsfree
agentstoassist
o nothingpreventsyoufromgettingalawyeryoujustcantpaythelawyerover$10
criminalpenaltiesbuiltintostatuteifyoupaythemontheside
AfterthiscaseCongresspassedtheVeteransJudicialReviewActof1988
o Nofeecap
o AppealfromBVAtoUSCourtsystem

10
o EvenwhenSCOTUSdidntruleitunconstitutional,thelegislativeprocessleadto
congresstomakechanges

11
 CONSTRUCTINGACIVILLAWSUIT:PLEADINGANDANSWERING
I) HISTORYOFCIVILPROCEDURE

HISTORYOFRULES
o Thereisdisagreementtohowtherulesareappliedandreallywhattheyevenmean
o Rulesthatgovernprocedureinfederalcourts
Mainlyinherewewilltalkaboutrulesthatgoverndistrictcourts(trialcourts)
o Thinkabouttherulesintermsofallocatingpower
Rights/powerof,,andcourt
Helpfultothinkabouttowhomtheruleisbenefittinginthissituation
Whatdoesitallowaparticularpartytodo/demand
Thereisaconstantpowerbalanceshiftwhereatcertainpointsthepowerchanges
o Intent/purpose/interpretationisveryimportant
Transformlandscapefromwheretheycamebeforeputeveryoneonequalfooting
o History
Needtoknowwhatcamebeforetherulesandwhattheyaresupposedtodo
Gotmostofourlawfrom(derived)Englandcommonlaw
Lawv.Equity
Rulesv.Fairness
Before
1.Writsystemspecificcauseofaction,specificprocedure,bringingcaseswashard
o RulesofCiv.ProaretranssubstantivetheFedruleswillapplyequallyacrosstheboard
toall
2.CodePleadingspecific,veryfactdependent.Inordertomakeyourclaimneededalotof
facts.Codespecificandhardtobringaclaimunlessyouhadalltheinformation
o RulesofCiv.ProNoticepleading,dontneedtopleadallofthefacts,justhavetogive
notice(notnearasspecific)Rule8(a)(2)
Originaldrivingforceoftheruleswastoopenupthecourthousetososuitswerent
dismissedforproceduraltechnicalitiesbeforethecouldbeheard
Beforeafedcourtwouldusethestatesprocedure,latercourtswoulduseuniformfedrules
o Wantittobesimpleandcourtsgettothemerits
Wanttobeabletoscreenoutfrivolouslawsuitsandharassment
o Areweswingingbacktowardspleadingfactsthattherulesweretryingtoavoid

II) PLEADINGANDRESPONDINGUNDERTHEFEDERALRULESOFCIVILPROCEDURE

THECOMPLAINT:THEBASICSTANDARDRULE8

RULE8
Primaryobjectiveistosimplifypleadingsandtoallowtogetthroughthedoorwiththeircases
Donotwantcasesthrownoutontechnicalities,liketheywerebefore
Requiresonlyashortandplainstatementoftheclaimshowingthatthepleaderisentitledto
relief.

12
 o Conleyv.Gibson
Law:Acomplaintissufficientaslongasthesetsforthanassertionuponwhichreliefmaybe
granted,andspecific,detailedrecitationsoffactarenotnecessarytosurviveamotiontodismiss
Facts:Groupofblackrailroadworkersbroughtacomplaintagainstuniontorepresentthem
withoutracialdiscrimination.Union,filedamotiontodismisstheclaimonthegroundthatthe
complaintwasdefectiveforfailuretostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegranted.
Issue:Cangeneralallegationswithoutspecificfactsallowtoproceedtotrial?(givespower)
Holding:Yes.Complaintshouldnotbedismissedforfailuretostateaclaimunlessitappearthat
canprovenosetoffactsinsupportofhisclaimFed.RulesofCiv.Pro.Dontrequireatoset
outindetailthefactsuponwhichhebaseshisclaim;onlyrequireshortandplainstatementof
theclaimthatwillgivefairnoticetothe.
Reasoning:Favorablescenarioforlettingthecontinue?Havetoallegetherewassomesortof
agreementthattheUnionwasjustgoingtorolloverandlettheRRtakeover(collusionto
discriminate).Atleastneedstogotodiscoverysocanseewhathappened.Dontwantto
punishthebecausethefactstheyneedaresecretbetweentheUnionandtheRR.
LegalDeficiencyArgument:thereisnolaw.Ifcomplainthasalotoffactsbutnolaw
entitlingyoutorelief,itfails
o Saidfailedtostateaclaim(saidtheyenteredintoafairagreementandtheyaredone
undertheAct,theyclaimtohavesatisfiedtheirobligationundertheAct)
o CourtsResponse:saysnotheyhavenot

FactualDeficiencyArgument:donthaveenoughfactstomakeclaim.Evenifthereislaw,
youstillneedtoallegeenoughfactstoputotherpartyonnotice
o Saidcomplainedfailedtosetforthspecificfactstosupportitsgeneralallegations
o CourtsResponse:saystheydonothavetohave,thatswhattheproceedingsarefor,to
gatherandarguethefact,saysthisisalowthreshold

Pleadyourselfoutofcourt
o Pleadtoomuchthatyoushowessentiallythroughthefactsthatyoupleadthereisnoway
torecoverfromtheclaim
CaseImportance:courttookveryrelaxedapproachtoRule8(a)(2)withshortandplain
statementforaclaimandclaimshouldnotbedismissedunlesscanprovenosetoffacts.Court
wantstogetpassedthepleadingstage,becauseneedsaccesstoevidencethatwillbeavailable
atthediscoverystage(alloftheevidenceiswiththe).Courtsaystakethesallegationsas
trueanddrawingallinferenceinthesfavor,isthereanysetoffactsthattheisentitledto
reviewifitis,theygetpastthepleadingstageitisverygenerous.

AmericanNursesAssociation
Law:UndertheFederalRulesofCivilProcedure,acomplaintmustnotbedismissedforfailure
tostateaclaimunlessitappearsbeyondadoubtthatthecannotstateasetoffactsuponwhich
reliefmaybegranted
Facts:Nursesarecomplainingthattheyaregettingpaidlessthanmenwithequaljobcategories.
TheysueunderTitleVIIandusedComparableWorthStudyaboutelectricians;whichshowed
Menwithjobsofalowerskilllevelgotpaidmorethanwomenwithjobsthatrequiredahigher
skilllevel.
Issue:Isarequiredinthecomplainttoallegeallthefactsthatsupporthisclaiminorderto
avoidamotiontodismiss?

13
 Holding:No.UnderRule8(a)(2),amustsimplyfileashortandplainstatementoftheclaim
showingheisentitledtotherelief.
Reasoning:Awhofilesalonganddetailedcomplaintmaypleadoutofcourt.Acomplaint
shouldnotbedismissedmerelybecauseitcontainsinvalidclaimswithvalidones,orbecause
thereisincompleteevidence.
CaseImportance:showswhencanpresenttoomuchinformationinthepleadingstage,thus
pleadinghimselfoutofcourt.Conleywouldtellthemtogotocourtandallowdiscoverytoprove
thatthemarketisnotneutral.saysthereisdiscriminatoryintentandiftheycangetto
discovery,thentheycanprovethatthereisdiscriminatoryintent
o Rule12(b)(6):DefensetoaClaim
Canmovetodismissacomplaintifafterviewingallegationsastrueandlookingatthe
complaininlightmostfavorabletothe(Conley),thecanprovenosetoffacts
musthavefairnoticeoftheclaim
Standardofdismissalhighthreshold(hardtogetridofacomplaint)
Canthecraftaresponsetothisallegation?isthereenoughfactualcircumstance
RulesofCiv.Pro.Aredesignedtofacilitatelitigation
ThreeWaystoDismissaComplaintUnderRule12(b)(6)
LegalDeficiency
FactualDeficiency
Pleadyourselfoutofcourt

THECOMPLAINT:NEWSTANDARD

Twombly
Law:Tostateaclaimunder1oftheShermanAct,thecomplaintmustcontainenoughfactual
materialtosuggestthatanagreementexistedbetweenthes
Facts:wereaclassofsubscriberstotelephoneandInternetservice.Broughtactionagainst,
whowerelocaltelephonebusinessregionalservicemonopolies?allegethatwereviolating
theShermanActbyconspiringtorestraintrade.Toproveconspiracy,theremustbean
agreement.allegeconsciousparallelism,whichdoesnotrequireanagreement.
Issue:Mustacomplaintcontainenoughfactualmaterialtosuggestanagreementexisted?Does
consciousparallelismALONEmakeoutaviolation?No,saysitscircumstantialevidencethat
thereissomeagreementtofixpricesandneedtogettodiscovery.
Holding:Yes.Courtheldthatallegationswereinsufficienttostateaclaim.Courtsays
allegationsofparallelconductmustbeplacedinafactualcontext,whichraisedaplausible
suggestionofanagreement,ratherthanidenticalindependentaction.Courtsayscomplaintdid
notindicatethatthecarriersresistancetocompetitorswasanythingmorethantheneutral,
unilateral,reactionofonkeepingitsregionaldominance.

14
 Reasoning:Discoveryissuperexpensiveandtrialjudgesarenotabletoeffectivelymanageit.
Complaintmustcontainenoughfactualmaterialtosuggestanagreementbetweens.Factual
allegationsmustbeenoughtoraisearighttoreliefabovethespeculativelevel.Thresholdof
plausibilitymustbecrossed.Thisisnotaheightenedpleadingofspecifics;onlythatitmuststate
enoughfactstostateaclaimtoreliefthatisplausible.THEREMIGHTBEANOTHER
EXPLAINATION.Possiblesomesetoffactsthatitstruethereisacontract,oritsjust
consciousparallelismandnocontract(even,nothingpushesittoonesideortheother,need
somethingtosuggestthattherewasacontract,notjustequalpossibility.Doesnudge
complaintoverthelinefrompossibletoprobable)Somethresholdofplausibilitymustbe
crossedattheoutsetbeforeapatentantitrustcaseshouldbepermittedtogointoitsinevitably
costlyandprotracteddiscoveryphase

Dissent:PurposeofRule8standardistogetpeopleincourt.Thisisaheighteningofthe
pleadingstandardtofactualplausibilityofaviolationfromlegallysufficiency.Themajorityis
rewritingtheCiv.RulesofProcedure,whichcongressshoulddo.Factswithconspiracyliewith
the.Wouldrathergettothepointwherethecangettheunderoath.Thisstageweshould
viewfactsinlightmostfavorabletoandthemajorityisdoingtheexactopposite.(Colangelo)
Plausibilityisdiedtodiscovery.Expectationthatdiscoverywillrevealevidenceofillegal
agreement.Withoutthepowerofthecourtbehindthe,itisnotrealisticthatthewillturnover
proofofagreementbeforediscovery.
CaseImportance:HEIGHTENEDPLEADINGSTANDARD!!CONLEY+FACTSARISE
ABOVESPECULATIVELEVEL.Groundshavetobeplausible.Plausibleisnotjust
possible,cannotjustbemerespeculation(legalconclusionthatspeculateastothefacts.Case
strikesoutConleydecision.GetsridofnosetoffactsfromConley.AfterTwombly,
plausibilityistheRule8standard.Courtisconcernedaboutdiscoveryanddonotthinkthat
enoughhasbeenshowntogettodiscovery.Courtsayswillnotopenpleadingfloodgatesunless
canprovethatwillcomeupwithsomethingfordiscovery.
Notonlyforantitrustcases:Footnote14,page336
Notapplyingtheheightenedpleadingstandard,ordoweseektobroadenthescopeofFed
Rule9whyarewetalkingaboutthis?Sayingtheyarentcreatingaheightenedpleading
standard,canyoulimitthistoantitrustcases?No,ThisisnowthestandardunderRule8,so
hardtosayitsonlyantitrust.IfcourtputantitrustinRule9,itwouldbejudicialactivism
andchangingthelaw.Leftwithanacrosstheboardrule.Reasonablebeliefthatdiscovery
willuncoversomething

Ashcroftv.Iqbal
TrialCourtsayspledenoughTwomblycomesdownAppealsCourtsayspledenough
SCOTUSsaysnotenough
Law:UnderTwombly,acomplaintwillonlysurviveamotiontodismissifitalleges
nonconclusoryfactsthat,takenastrue,stateaclaimtoreliefthatisplausibleonitsface

15
 Facts:IqbalsuesAshcroftandMullerfordiscrimination.FBIwasroundingupArabsbecause
theywanttoprotectthecountry.Heplacedinmaximumsecurityandabused.movedto
dismissthecomplaintforfailuretostateaclaim.Theirmaindefenseisqualifiedimmunity.Iqbal
bringsBivensAction,whichrecognizesanimpliedprivaterightthatallowshimtosuethe
government(mustshowdiscriminatoryintent,howcanyoushowintentwhenpleadingifthe
typicallydoesnotgiveitup?).ComplaintaccusedofbeingprincipalarchitectsandMueller
ofinstrumentalinimplementationbasedsolelyonreligion,race,andnationalorigin.isonly
challenginghisconditionsofimprisonment.
Issue:UnderTwombly,willacomplaintsurviveamotiontodismissiffactsallegedare
conclusoryinnature?
Holding:No.Claimhastobeplausible.Mereconsistencyisnotenough.
TwoprongapproachthatTwomblyprovides:
o Merelegalconclusions/nopresumptionoftruth
o Plausiblecontentfactspecific
Reasoning:didnotpleadenoughfactualmatterthatiftakenastruestatesaclaimfactual
sufficiency.Justknowledgebytheaboutthebadstuffgoingonisnotenough.Legal
conclusionsarenotentitledtopresumptionoftruth.Courtmustseparatelegalconclusionsand
factualconclusions,stripthelegalconclusions,andonlylookifremainingfactualallegations
plausiblystateaclaim.Judgewillusejudicialexperienceandcommonsense.Inthiscasedid
notnudgehisclaimsofdiscriminationacrossthelinefromconceivabletoplausibleandonly
containsbareassertions.
Dissent(Souter):(wrotedissentforTwombly).Correcttestis:justneedknowledgeoftheactof
discriminationofAshcroftandMuellerandthenlookatthemnotdoinganything.Hesaysmust
takethelegalconclusionsandcombinethemwiththefactualallegations,youhaveenoughand
havecrossedthelinefrompossibletoplausible.Soutersaysnoprinciplelineyoucandraw
betweenconclusionoflawandfactallegation.Nodistinctionbetweenthetwo,atsomepointyou
willcrossintofactandconclusionoflaw.Alsobelievestherecouldbevicariousliability
(Majoritybelievesthatbecausecantrecoveronatheoryofresponeatsuperiorthathecant
recoverunderanytheoryofsupervisoryliability)pleadingswerenotconclusory,buteither
wascourthastotakeallegationsastrue.Thisisheighteningthestandardagain,asitshouldbe:
plausiblemeansnotjustpossible(possiblemeanstwoequallypersuasivecompeting
interpretations);andshort.
CaseImportance:DoesmorethanTwombly,andshowedthatitsnotjustlimitedtoantitrust
casesasthoughinTwombly.Judgewillmakedeterminationbeforesubmittinganything(Rule
7(a)).Mereconclusionsoflawandentitledtopresumptionoftruth,mereconsistencywith
liabilityisnotenough.
CourtFramesRule8(a)(2)
o RuleDemandsmore
Factualallegationsmustbeplausible
Ifpleadingfactsconsistentwithdiscrimination,notenough
Ifpossible,notenough,mustbeplausible
o FromhereupisbasicallyTwombly,Revolutionarybelow
o Makingadistinctionbetweenlegalconclusionsandfactualallegations
Legalconclusionsdonothavetobepresumedtobetrue
Now2stepsforthecourt

16
 1.Identifylegalconclusions(asopposedtofactualallegations)andstripthem
fromthecomplaint
2.Lookatthefactsevaluatewhethertheremainingfactualallegations
reasonably(plausibly)stateaclaimforrelief
Howdowetellifacomplaintisplausible?
Contextspecifictask
Requiresthecourttousejudicialexperienceandcommonsense
Completelysubjective
Conclusoryallegationseitheroffernofactsorrequireexcessive,
unreasonableinferentialsteps
Legalconclusionsarenotentitledtoapresumptionoftruth
UseTwombly=>thecourtsaysthatthelegalconclusionwasaboutantitrustand
allegedaconspiracy,ifthecourtthenhadacceptedthatcomplaintastruethe
pleadingwouldhavesurvived,buttheydidntbecauseitwasalegalconclusion
Inthiscase,Allegingthereisadiscriminatorypurpose,justalegalconclusion
Whatisthebasicdistinctionbetweenlegalconclusionsandfactualallegations?
Inthiscaselegalconclusionsare:
Ashcroftwastheprincipalarchitect
Muellerwasinstrumentalinadoptingandexecutingit
Factualallegationsare:
FBIarrestedanddetainedthousandsofArabMuslimMen
Thepolicyofholdingdetaineesinhighlyrestrictiveconditionsofconfinement
untiltheywereclearedbytheFBIwasapprovedby
Cabin(limit)todiscovery
No,tooexpensive
Concernsoflitigation
Qualifiedimmunitydoctrinewholepointistoprotectthemandthemost
expensivepartisdiscovery
FedRulesallowhimtostateaclaimundergeneralterns
Generallyisarelativeterm
Courtsaysthatruleappliestorule9andisarguingunderrule8
SimilaritiesBetweenTwomblyandIqbal
LikeTwombly:inbothcaseshavesituationsthatcanbeexplainedbycompetingrationales.
TwocompetingissuesinbothTwomblyandIqbal.
Twomblyhadparallelconduct,questioniswhetherthereisanagreementbetweenthe
companiesorifitisaresultofeconomicmarkets
Iqbal,FBIroundsuppeopleofAraboriginbecausetheyarediscriminatingagainstthemor
theyareroundingupArabpeoplebecausetheywanttoprotectthecountry
Argumentisthatthesetwocasesstoptoomanycasesfromgettingtocourtandallowingfor
moreheightenedpleading.Caseskeepfrivolouslawsuitsout.

ATSMamaniv.Berzain
Facts:Claimsagainsthumanityarisingfromthekillingpeople,UnderlyinglawistheAlien
TortStatutethatgivesUSfedcourtsjurisdictioninviolationofatortofthelawofthenations.
ATShasnothadmanycases,butrecentlySCOTUSruledtheyhadjurisdictionovercompanies

17
 andithastakenoff.Districtcourtaffirmedsomeoftheclaimscouldgoforwardandsomewere
notokay.Internationallawistheapplicablelaw
Issue:Immunityissue:waswhattheyweredoingpartoftheofficialacts?Weretheyactininan
officialcapacitywhentheyweretryingtostoptheproteststhestate(Bolivia)waivedimmunity
Holding:SCOTUSsaidtobecarefuladjudicatingcaseswithforeignrelations.Counterargument
isthatCongressandPrezenactedATS
Reasoning:Thecomplaintfailsinthatitisfactuallydeficient(factsaretooconclusive)and
legallydeficient(noclearinternationallawthatdefineswhatclaimsagainsthumanityare.
Indefinitestateofinternationallaw)oddbecausenointernationallawcitedandwhataboutall
theNazistuffandvarioustribunes
Iqbalinaction:Ignorelegalconclusionsandlookatfactualconclusions;Legalconclusions
withoutadequatefactualsupportareentitledtonoassumptionoftruth;Whileplaintiffsneed
notincludedetailedfactualallegations,theymustpleadmorethananunadorned,the
defendantunlawfullyharmedmeaccusation.;Hereweareseeingthathereitcouldbethatthe
weredirectingthetroopstokillcitizensanditsequallyplausiblethattheyweretryingtostop
theprotest
o Whatarethelegalconclusions?
isattackinginnocentpeople
o Whatarethefacts?
:Blockedhighways;ThattheDefenseMinistermayhavebeendirectingmilitary
personnelnottofire??Lookatthecomplaintthatsatisfiedruleandheightened
standards(thejudgeusessubjectiveresultoriented);Weknowtheclaimis
factuallydefective(whichwedontactuallyknow)competingtheories?
AlsoclaimgardenvarietytortsallegedbyFloridalaw
Adjudicativejurisdiction=includessubjectmatterjurisdictionand
personaljurisdiction
Prescriptivejurisdiction=allowstomakelaws(legislatureforsure)not
limitedtoU.S.ifyougoabroadandjoinISIS
HowdoesFLlawapplytosomethingthattookplaceinBoliviathatare
notUScitizens(noconnectionwithUS)?
Privateinternationallawideaiswhenyouhaveamultiplejurisdictional
transactionordispute,thecourtchooseswhichlawapplies
o arguethatyoudidnthavenoticethatFloridalawwouldapply
(const.requiresthatyouhavetogivereasonablenotice

III) PLEADINGINTHEALTERNATIVE

STANDARDFORPLEADINGINTHEALTERNATIVE

RULE8(d)(2)
Apartymaysetouttwoormorestatementsofaclaimordefense,eitherinasinglecountor
inseparateones
CivilPracticeActexpresslypermitsatopleadinconsistentcountsinthealternative,where
heisgenuinelyindoubtastowhatthefactsareandwhattheevidencewillshow.Thelegal
sufficiencyofeachcountpresentsaseparatequestion.
Whenyoucanyounotpleadinthealternative?
o Ifyouknowwhathappeneditisabusive,pleadercannothaveknowledgeoftruefacts
18
 o ComparedtoTwomblyandIqbal
Ononehand,rulethatalternativepleadingisokaywhenyoudontknowbetweenthetwo
alternatives(butundertheTwomblyandIqbalstandarditisinconsistent)
Ontheotheryoucanhavetwoalternativetheoriesbuttheycantbeequallypossibleexplanations
togetpastpleading

McCormickv.Kopmann
Law:Amaypleadtwocausesofactiontogetherinthesamecomplaint,eveniftheallegations
aremutuallyexclusive.
Facts:McCormickswidowsuesKopmannandHulsintwoseparatecountsforthedeathof
McCormick.Shedoesnotknowifhisdeathwasfromdrinkingatlocaltavernornegligenceof
Mr.Kopmannsdriving.Shepleadsboth.claimsinconsistentHusbandcouldnotbefree
fromcontributorynegligenceasallegedinCountI,ifhisintoxicationcausedtheaccidentas
allegedinCountIV
Issue:Canapleadmutuallyexclusivecausesofactioninthesamecomplaint?
Holding:Yes.Amaypleadtwoseeminglyconflictingcausesofactioninthesamecomplaint
soifoneisprovedtheotherwillbefactuallyimpossible.Thisiswhenapartydoesntknow
whichstatementistrue,canpleadboth,evenifinconsistentwitheachother
Reasoning:Courtsfavorthealternativepleadingsandtheoriestobebroughttogetherbecause
otherwiseitisnotefficient.Thisisokayunder8(d)(2)ifthereisagenuinedoubtastowhatthe
factsareandwhattheevidencewillshow.Theisentitledtohaveallevidencegiventothetrier
offacttoletthejuryfigureitout.Theshouldnotbeforcedtodecidebetweenalternatives
beforegoingtothejurybecausethatwouldnegatethepurposeofthealternativepleadings.
CaseImportance:allowsforoptionsifthereisagenuinedoubtastowhathappened
didntfileforseverancetotaketheclaimsaparttotwoseparatejuries
o Whydidnttheyseverthem?
o caseisIwasntnegligentandMcCormickwasdrunklawyerthinksthattheis
goingtomakethecaseforyouonthesecondcount
o hasmoreoptionsoneofthesetwohappened,theideathatherhusbandwassoberand
negligentisnotreallypresent

19
IV)RESPONDINGTOTHECOMPLAINT

RULESANDFORMS
o maydenythefactualallegationsofthecomplaint
o Confessionandavoidanceconcedefactsaretrue,butassertotherfactsorlawprovidethewitha
legalout
o Motiontodismissforfailuretostateaclaiminwhichthemovantadmitsthefactsasstated,but
insistslawdoesnotsupporttheclaim
o Jurisdictionandvenueproblem
o Counterclaimwheretheraisesanindependentclaimforreliefagainst
o Other:badnotice,serviceofprocess,orotherdefectsinthecomplaint

PREANSWERMOTION
o RelationshipbetweenRule8(a)(2)andRule12(b)(6)
Thedefendantmovingonthegroundthatthecomplaintdoesnotstateagroundforrelief:Rule
8(a)(2)
PursuanttoRule12(b)(6)defendantcanmovethattheclaimisnotcomplete
o WhyfileRule12(b)(6)motion;youdonothavetogotrial,providesmoretimetoplanresponse,
hopethatthejudgewillruleinyourfavor,puttingitontheplaintiffandallowsformoreinformation
fromtheotherside,runsupcostfortheotherside
o Whymightyoujustwanttoanswer:dangersofeducation(othersidenowhasyourstrategyfor
attackingthecomplaint),judgewillbeirritatedifyoumakenotionsjusttodisadvantagetheother
sideandhemightnotlikeyouorsanctionyou,youshowyourcasetotheotherside,gettodiscovery
quicker

ANSWER

Fuentesv.Tucker
Law:Ifanissueisremovedfromthecasebecauseofanadmissioninthedefendantsanswer,it
isnotincontroversyforthepurposesoftrial,andevidenceshouldnotbepresentedtothefact
finderregardingthatissue.Ifwantstoadmitliability,itshouldbeintheanswer.
Issue:Canapartypresentevidencerelatingtoanallegationthathasbeenadmittedtointhe
answer,ifthatissueisnolongerincontroversy?
Holding:No.Apartymaynotpresentevidencerelatingtoanissuethathasbeenresolved.May
onlybepropertoallowevidenceofadmittedfactsifadmissionisambiguousorlimitedinscope,
oriftheisattemptingtobarfromsubmittingkeyfacts.
Reasoning:Proofattrialissupposedtobelimitedtotheissuesinthecasebecauseitwouldbea
wasteoftimeotherwise.Afunctionofpleadingsistolimitandnarrowtheissues.Theevidence
willcauseconfusionandwastethecourtstime.
Concurrence:Agreesthatthejudgmentshouldbeaffirmed(agreeingwiththeoutcome)but
disagreeswiththereasoning.Believesthatthejudgmentaboutnotlettinginfactsandconcealing
theculpabilityandfavortheworseoffendersbythemnotpayingasmuch.Theoreticallyor
academicallyitmightbejustifiedbutinpracticemaybenot
CaseImportance:Pleadingsshapetheevidenceyoucanbringattrial.Youcanonlybringin
evidenceofthingsthatarerelevanttotheissueattrialorelsetheycouldbeprejudicial.

Zielinskiv.PhiladelphiaPiers

20
 Law:Ageneraldenialisineffectiveifsomeoftheclaimsdeniedaretrueandnotatissue
Issue:Shouldaallowedtodenyfactsinacomplaintifhehasmadeanineffectivedenialof
thosefactsandknowinglyallowsatocontinuetorelyonthem?
Holding:No.Awhoknowinglymakesinaccuratestatementsshouldbeestoppedfrom
denyingthemattrial.(hadtomakeanadmissionthatitwasthepropertothejury).
Reasoning:Thisisanexampleofcourtdiscretion.Thekneworshouldveknownaboutthe
mistakeandthewasnotaware.Rule8(b)noncompliancewiththeruleheshallspecifyso
muchofitasistrueandmaterialandshalldenyonlytheremainder.Notenoughtohavea
generaldenial,youmustbemorespecific.Ifwouldhaveknownabouttheownershipswitch,
hewouldhaveaccuratelybroughttheactionagainsttheproper.

AFFIRMATIVEDEFENSESANDAMENDINGTHEPLEADINGS
Anaffirmativedefensetoacivillawsuitorcriminalchargeisafactorsetoffactsotherthanthose
allegedbytheplaintifforprosecutorwhich,ifprovenbythedefendant,defeatsormitigatesthelegal
consequencesofthedefendant'sotherwiseunlawfulconduct

21
Gomezv.Toledo
Law:Goodfaithisanaffirmativedefense,andassuchtheburdenisonthedefendanttopleadit
Facts:Gomezwasapoliceofficerinspecialinvestigationunitandwasdemotedtopolice
academyaftersubmittingallegationsofcriminalconduct.Hewasdischargedforbeingawhistle
blower.Afterhewasreinstatedhebroughtsuitclaimingthedischargeviolatedhisprocedural
dueprocessandcausedhimanxiety,embarrassment,andinjurytohisreputationinthe
community
Issue:Inordertostateaclaim,mustapleadgoodfaithasanaffirmativedefense?
Holding:No.Qualifiedimmunityisanaffirmativedefensealthoughitisnotlistedasonein
Rule8(c).Rulenowhasthewordincludingmeansthatitisnotanexhaustivelist,which
basicallymeansthatcanincludeanything.
Reasoning:Purposeofthestatutewastoprovideremedyifyourrightshavebeenviolated,and
nothinginthelanguageorhistorysuggestsamustallegebadfaithinordertostateaclaimfor
reliefonly(1)mustallegethatsomepersonhasdeprivedhimofafederalright,and(2)he
mustallegethatthepersonwhohasdeprivedhimofthatrightactedundercolorofstateor
territoriallaw.
CaseImportance:Showsjudicialcreationofanaffirmativedefense,sonowqualifiedimmunity
isanaffirmativedefenseIwhichthemustprove.UsestheCanonofConstruction:expresso
uniestexclusioalteriustheexpressionofonethingexcludesothers

Ingrahamv.UnitedStates
Law:UnderRule8(c),affirmativedefensesmustbepleadedinatimelyfashion,orelsethe
defensesarewaived

22
 Facts:Thisisaconsolidatedcaseinvolvingtwoplaintiffsthatgotlargejudgmentsagainstthe
governmentinmedicalmalpracticecases.Afterthejudgmentswererendered,thegovernment
camebackandobjectedtothefactthatthedamagesweremorethanwhatwaslimitedbyaTexas
medicalliabilityact.GovernmentdidnotraiseexistenceoftheMalpracticeActasanaffirmative
defense.
Issue:Mustanaffirmativedefensebepleadedbeforeajudgmentisentered?
Holding:Yes.Affirmativedefensesmustbepleadedintheanswer.Plaintiffcannotbe
unfairlysurprised.Courtsaysifsomethingispartoftheplaintiffscase,itshouldbepleadbythe
plaintiff.Ifitnotinthereanditisextrinsicthenitfallsondefendant.
Reasoning:Hadtheknownaboutthecaptheywouldhavefocusedmoreonthemedical
damagesvsemotionaldamagesthatiswherethecapwas.Rule12(h)sayswhatdefenseare
waivedifyoufailtoraisethem:thisstatutewouldnotbeinthislist,andtheruleexplicitlysays
herearethedefenses,doesntlistthisone;therefore,8(c)counterargumentsayingthatyouhave
tostateyouraffirmativedefenses,anditisuptothecourtsdiscretion
Testisrequiredtomakeadetermination:
1.Whetherthematteratissuefairlymaybesaidtoconstituteanecessaryorextrinsic
elementintheplaintiffscauseofaction
2.Whichparty,ifeither,hasbetteraccesstorelevantevidence
3.Policyconsiderations:shouldthematterbeindulgedordisfavored
o itisintrinsic(insidecauseofaction,willbeabletoanticipateit)
o orextrinsic(outsideofcauseofaction,thenwillnotbeabletoanticipateit)
CaseImportance:Affirmativedefensesmustbepleadedintheanswer.Thepointofpleading
affirmativedefensesistopreventunfairsurprise.wouldhavemadedifferentargumentshad
theyknownthatthiswouldcomeup.
o Seepage415forwhenyoucan/cantamendapleading

Barcumev.CityofFlint
Law:UnderRule15(c),theamendmentofapleadingrelatesbacktothedateoftheoriginal
pleadingwhentheamendedclaimarisesoutofthesameconduct,transaction,oroccurrenceset
forthintheoriginalpleading;thereforetheamendedpleadingisnotbarredbythestatuteof
limitationsdefenses.
Facts:Complaint01/30/1984,discovery,movestoamendin12/4/1985,Courtgranted
06/23/1986,3yearstatuteoflimitationpassed,filedamendmenton02/26/1987.Plaintiffsare
allfemaleemployeesandthecaseisacivilrightsaction.Theplaintiffsfiledtheoriginal
complaintin1984thathadfivecounts,noneofwhichincludedsexualharassment.The
plaintiffsfileasecondcomplaintin1987andthedefendantsarguethattheclaimsinthesecond
complaintarebarredbecauseofthestatuteoflimitations.
Issue:DoesthenewamendmentclaimsrelatebacktoovertaketheSOLwhentheamended
claimaroseoutofthesameconduct,transaction,oroccurrencesetforthintheoriginalpleading?
Holding:Yes.Rule15(c)allowsacomplainttobeamendediftheclaimarosefromthesame
scenarioastheoriginalpleading.Theideaistobesurethatthedefendanthasbeenputonnotice
oftheentirescopeofthescenario.Ifthealterationissosignificantastonotgiveadequatenotice
tothedefendantthentheamendmentwillnotrelatebackandwillbetimebarredifthestatueof
limitationshasrun.

23
 Anamendmentthatallegesaddedtothesameinjurymayrelateback.Iftheamendment
changesthelegaltheoryitmaybeokayifthefactualsituationisthesameandthedefendant
hadnoticeofthatwiththeoriginalclaim.
Anamendmentdoesnotrelatebackifitassertsanewclaimforreliefbasedondifferentfacts
notsetforthintheoriginalcomplaint,anditmaybebarred
Reasoning:Amendmentsincertaincircumstancesarepermittedbecausethehasalreadybeen
putonnoticeofthetransactionoutofwhichthenewclaimarises,andassuchwouldnotcause
anunfairsurprise.Inthiscasethehiringandpromotionrelatesback,buttheharassment/hostile
workenvironmentdoesnotrelateback.Theideaistoliberallyallowpleadingsandamended
pleadings,butnotinawaythatallowsdiscriminationtootherparties.Whenitturnsoutthat
otherthingscanbeadded,wanttogettheminsonotmanynumeroustrials.
CaseImportance:Amendingthepleadingisstillaboutdueprocess.Canamendcomplaintto
includeanewlegaltheory.Judgeshavediscretiontodeemsomethingasanaffirmativedefense,
allowtherelationbackandallowthedefensetobewaived.Judgewilllookatnoticetoseeif
beingunfair,becausestillneedtogivepropernoticeinamendingthecomplaint

o tensionbetweenpleadingsurvivingamotiontodismissandbeingabletorelateback
pushedtopleadindetail
andthemorespecificyougetthelessopportunityyouhavetorelateback
ifyouhavelitigationinmotionandotherclaimscomeup,itsmoreefficientifyouareabletoget
themincludedatthesametime

V) SANCTIONSANDFRIVOLOUSCASES
RULE11
Frivolouslawsuits
Improperpurpose
Legallyfrivolousnotgoodfaithefforttochangelaw
Factuallyfrivolous

24
 o Kraemerv.GrantCounty
InquiryReasonableUndertheCircumstances
1983 NOW
Mandatorysanctionsfor Discretionarysanctionscourthastoissueordertoshowcauseinordertosanction
bringingfrivolouslawsuits Deterrencenonmonetary
Compensation(refundthe Safeharbor
attorney)
Eithersomeevidentiarysupport,orifdiscoveryislikelytogetevidence
Wellgroundedinfact
Lawfirmscanbeliable
SCOTUSinterpreteditas
lawfirmnotliable
Lateradvocating,haveanobligationtobringproblemtocourtsattention
Suaspontedecide Okayifyouaskcourttomakenewlaw
sanctions Denialoffactualcontentionmusthaveevidencetobackup
Legalcontentionsmustbe Suaspontestillbutmusthaveahearing
formedafterareasonable Nosanctionsifcounselisbadatknowingthelaw
inquiry
Aninquiryreasonableunderthecircumstances(allowforcasebycase)
Moresubjective
Law:Anattorneysinvestigationintothefactsneedonlybereasonable,andhisinvestigationis
notrequiredtocarryhimtothepointofabsolutecertainty.Attorneyhiredaprivateinvestigator,
buthewasnotabletoconfirmordenyherstorybasedonthefactsgathered
Facts:LauraKramersfiancdiedandafterhisdeathhisparentscameandtooklotsofthe
belongings.Shehadlotsofproblemswiththelawandwithhisparentsandwasbeing
discriminatedagainstbythestate.
Issue:MustanattorneybeabsolutelycertainofthefactsbeforefilingsuitinordertoavoidRule
11sanctions?
Holding:No.
Reasoning:Reasonable:timeattorneyhastoinvestigate;extenttowhichtheattorneyhadtorely
onhisclientinordertolearnthefacts;thecomplexityofthecase;andtheextenttowhichaccess
todiscoverymaterialwouldaidtheattorneyinlearningthefacts.Thearentjustgoingto
cooperate.Rule11incasescouldundermineattorneysabilitytoadvocateforpowerless

o Saltanyv.Reagan
ImproperPurpose
Law:WhenthedistrictcourtfindsthatapartyhasviolatedRule11,itmustimposeasanction
Facts:Libyansuingdemandingdamagesforinjuries,deathandpropertylossesfromUSair
strikeonLibya.Thedistrictcourtfoundthattherewasnopossibilityofsuccessbutitdidnt
imposesanctionsbasedonthepublicpolicyofkeepingcourtsaccessibleforwhowanttobring
casesagainstthegovernmentasaformofprotest
Issue:WhenapartyhasviolatedRule11,mustthecourtimposeasanction?
Holding:Yes,itiswellestablishedrule(beforethechange)thatifviolateRule11theyMUST
besubjecttosanction
Reasoning:Courtdoesnotwanttofilecasestheyknowareimpossibletowin.Courtdoesnt
wanttimeandresourcestobewasted
CaseImportance:BeforethenewRule11,theycouldntaskforextension/modification/
reversalofnewlaw.Nowifyoumakeagoodlegalclaim,andgoodfaithargumentitmaybe
different.

25
 o Saltanyv.Bush
Holding:Lawofthecasedoctrinebarsthechallengesincethecourthasalreadyheardthecase.
Thecourthasalreadydecidedonthelegalissue,itissancionableanddontwanttorehearthe
case.Noclearerrorcombinedwithmanifestinjustice
Reasoning:CourtrejectsCooter,whichchangedthestandardofreviewfromdenovotoabuse
ofdiscretion.CourtsaidthatCooterdoesntconstituteinterveninglawonRule11issue
Dissent:Cootersaysdefertodistrictcourtfordeterminationonwhethertoimposesanctions,
andinthiscasetheyalreadydecidedno,soimpropertoturnhopelesscommentintoviolation
whencourtwouldntimposesanctions

o Frantzv.U.S.PowerliftingFederation
WarrantedbyExistingLaw
Law:ToavoidRule11sanction,apartymustperformlegalresearchbeforefilingacomplaint
tobesurethattheclaimisnotfrivolous,andeachclaiminthecomplaintmustbecolorable
Facts:Twoweightlifterssuedifferentfederationsforconspiringtomonopolizethesportof
weightlifting.Thecomplaintwasdismissedundera12(b)(6)motionforfailuretostateaclaim
uponwhichreliefcouldbegranted.Thecourtimposessanctionsandthecourtisshockedbythe
quantityofthesanctions(40hours)sohevacatesthem.
Issue:Doesacourthavetoperformlegalresearchbeforefilingacomplaint?
Holding:Yes.ToavoidRule11sanction,apartymustperformlegalresearchbeforefilinga
complainttobesurethattheclaimisnotfrivolous.counseldidnthavetopleadthefactshe
hadtosupporteachclaim,buthehadtoknowthefacts.Eachoftheclaimsmustbeconsidered
separately.MerelyaddingcolorableclaimdoesntkeepclaimaliveforRule11purposes
o Reasoning:Appealscourtthoughtthe40hoursmightnothavebeenoutrageousImproperfor
Districtcourttoreversecoursesanctionaredeterminedbasedonthepapersthefilesandifit
warrantsRule11sanctionstheyshouldbesanctioned,doesntmatterwhatthedoesin
response.Justbecausethereisalegaltheory,doesntmeanthatitsurvivessanctions.
InteractionbetweenRule11andRule8
o Noheightenedpleadingrequirement
o Mayknowfactsthatarechosennottobeincludedinthecomplaint

VI) INHERENTPOWERTOSANCTION

o Chambersv.NASCO
Facts:NASCOmovesforsanctionagainstChambersbecauseheisapainintheasstothecourt
andeveryoneelseinvolved.Issueiswhethercourthasinherentpowertosanction.
Courtheld:Courthasupheldotherinherentpowersinthepast(vacatingjudgmentand
contempt),soshouldhaverighttodosomethinglesserlikesanctionattorneys.Courtalreadyhas
broadpower.Courtmustfindandfaithtouseinherentpower

DISCOVERY
I) DISCOVERYOFTHEADVERSARYSCASE

DISCOVERY
Discoveryrulesreflectorigininequity
26
 Partiescansubpoenadocumentsandrequestswitnessesandfacts;deposition
Discoverywasreallyliberalsothatthepartieswouldworktogether,butnowithasbeenused
asatooltoforcetheothersidetosettle(strikesuites)becauseitissoexpensiveandtime
consuming
Leteverythinginbecausewanttogettheplaintiffintocourt
Themoreinformationthateachsidehasalsoallowsforsettlementandlimitsthecasesgoing
tocourt
MandatoryInitialDisclosure
Argumentsformandatoryinitialdisclosure
o Becausewillhavetodisclosethisinformationanyway
o Willreducegainsmanshipbygettingalloftheinformationoutthereandwillshift
burdentoattorneytogetinformationouttheretogettruthfulness
o Alsothecasewillgetoutofcourtfasterandprovidesforsettlement
Argumentsagainstmandatoryinitialdisclosure
o Shouldnothavetodotheworkfortheotherside(contrarytotheadversaryprocess)
o Onesidecandumpalloftheirinformationontheotherside,byexposingeverything;it
makesitimpossibleforthemtofindanything
ScopeofDiscovery
Originallydiscoverycouldbehadonanyinformationrelevanttothesubjectmatter:canstill
getinfothatsrelevanttothesubjectmatterbuthavetoshowcauseandgetanorderfrom
thecourt
Nowdiscoveryhastoberelevanttoanyclaimofdefense
YoucantNOTdisclosebecausetheothersidedidntdisclose
Districtcourtshavealotofcontrol
Cost/benefitanalysis:Rule26(b)(2)
Ifthecostofconductingthediscoverywillfarexceedthebenefittotheotherside,thenthecourt
cangetridofit

RULE26

o Chalickv.CooperHospital
Law:UnderRule26(a)apartymustdisclosethename,address,andnumberofeachperson
likelytohavediscoverableinformation,alongwiththesubjectofthatinfo,orelsethepartymay
besubjecttosanctions.
Facts:MedMalsuitaftersondies.wantedtoamendcomplaintaccordingtoRule15(c)to
includeanotherdoctor.doesalotofdiscoverybutdoesntgetinfoononeparticulardoctor.
DiscoveryProcess
o Disclosures:onlyprovidedDr.Burns'namesanddidnotgivethebasisoftheknowledge
asitpertainstothecase
o Interrogatories:onlygaveDr.Burnsnameagainandstilldonotknowwhoheisorhis
involvementinthecase
o Writtenquestionstothehospitalthattheyhavetoanswer
o Depositions:thisiswheretheplaintifflearnedthatDr.Burnswasactuallyinvolvedin
thetreatmentofChalick

27
 Issue:Whethertheadditionofanotherrelatesbacktothefilingoftheoriginalcomplaint
(underRule15(c)wherethefailedtomeetrequirementsofRule26(havetorelateback
becauseSOLhaspassed)Mustapartydisclosethename/infoofeachpersonlikelytohave
discoverableinformation,alongwiththesubjectofthatinformation?
Holding:Yes.TheDr.isestoppedfromsayinghedidnthavenoticeoftheclaim.
Reasoning:Burnssharesanidentityofinterestwiththehospital,theyareallwrappedupinthe
samedefenseandwillhavethesameargumentsasthehospitalandother.Courtwillnotallow
himtobeprejudice(butcanaccommodatebygivingmoretimefordiscovery).Itwasallowedto
relatebackbecausetheywanttogettothemerits,andknowledgetypicallylieswithinmed
mal.UnderRule11onceknowsacertainwasnotinvolved,hemuststrikethemfromthe
complaint.Policycurbgamesmanship
Conflictingdutiesoflawyers
o Ruledesignedtoprotect/helpbothandalteringcomplainttoremovenotinvolved
aswellascourtwithnotwastingtimemanipulatingdiscovery
Zealousadvocateononehand,buthaveadutytotellthetruth
ModelEthicsRule33prohibitsalawyerfrommakingafalsestatementtoatribunal
Dutytocorrectthecourtiftheymissamaterialfact?Notnecessarilybasedonthelanguage

SCOPEOFDISCOVERY

o Blankv.Sullivan&Cromwell
Law:UnderRule26,apartyisentitledtodiscoveryofinformationthatappearsreasonably
calculatedtoleadtothediscoveryofadmissibleevidence
Facts:Plaintiffsarewomenlawyerswhohadunsuccessfullyappliedforpositionsasassociates;
theysued,allegingsexualdiscriminationinhiring.Duringdiscoverytheplaintiffswanttoget
informationaboutthehiringpracticesofpartnersfromwithinthefirmthroughinterrogatories
abouteverypersonwhomadepartner.
Issue:Isapartyentitletodiscoveryofinformationthatappearsreasonablycalculatedtoleadto
thediscoveryofadmissibleevidence?
Holding:Yes.Whethermenwerehiredandmadepartnerinsteadofsimilarlysituatedwomenis
relevantinformationindeterminingifthefirmwasengaginginsexdiscrimination.
Reasoning:Courtsaidthatfirmhadtorespondtotheinterrogatories.Promotionpracticesmay
bereflectiveofrestrictiveorexclusionaryhiringpractices.Althoughitmightnotbeadmissible
intrial,itmayhelpfindinfothatisadmissibleintrial
CaseImportance:Thisisdifferentundernewrulesmighthavetoshowcause,canstillget
informationaslongasyoucanproveitmayleadyoutoinfotouseattrial.Originallythe
discoverygivenhadtorelatetothesubjectmatter,butafteramendmentsithastoberelevanttoa
claimordefense.Discoveryallowsforadmissionofbroaderevidence

28
II) WORKPRODUCTANDATTORNEYCLIENTPRIVILEGES

o HickmanvTaylor
Law:opposingcounselmustdemonstratenecessity,justification,orundueprejudiceforaccess
tocounselswrittenstatements,privatememoranda,andpersonalrecollections
Facts:Theattorneydoesnotwanttogiveupinformationthatanattorneygatheredfrom
witnessesofashipwreckduringinterviewsthattheattorneyhadwiththewitnesses.Opposing
counselaskedforexactcopiesofallwrittenstatementsandsummariesofinfotakenorally.
Issue:Isopposingcounselswrittenstatements,privatememoranda,andpersonalthoughts
attorneyclientprivilege?
Holding:No,butcangettheinformationbecauseitisworkproductprivilege.
Reasoning:Theydidntshownecessityandtheyalreadyhaveitfromthepublichearing.Court
saysthattheattorneyclientprivilegedoesnotapply,createsnewworkproductprivilege.
Theinfodoesnotfallunderattorneyclientprivilegebecausethewitnessesarenotclients
Notesthatopposingcounselistryingtogettheworkfromthemindoftheattorneywithout
showinganynecessityorclaimingthatdenialofsuchproductionwouldundulyprejudicethe
preparationoftheircaseorcausethemanyhardshiporinjustice.
CaseImportance:Attorneysallowedcertainprivilegessotheydonothavetodisclosecertain
infotoopposingcounselduringdiscovery.MentalImpression:differencebetweenthestatements
givenbythewitnessesandthelawyersnotesontheinterviews.Attorneymustshownecessityor
indicationthatdenialofproductionwouldundulyprejudicethepreparationofthecaseandcause
himharm.Afterthiscase,
Rule26
wasrevisedtoshowthatnecessityandjustificationare
needed:
1.Necessity
2.Unduehardship/prejudice
3.Inabilitytogetbyothermeans
PrivilegeLogs:asattorneygoesthroughmaterialwillhavetokeepalogofprivilegedmaterial
andwhyitisprivileged

o UpjohnvUnitedStates
Law:Inthecorporatecontext,theattorneyclientprivilegeappliestonotonlythosehighlevel
employeeswhohavetheauthoritytoactonthelegaladviceoftheattorney,butalsotoanyof
thoseemployeeswhoprovideinformationtotheattorneysothathemaygivesuchlegaladvice
Facts:leadattorneydidaninvestigationtoinvestigatequestionablepaymentstoforeign
governments.Attorneycreatedtwotypesofdocuments1.)Questionnairesthatweresentoutand
respondedtobytheemployeeand2.)Notesthathetookduringinterviewofhisownthoughts.
Defendantwantsbothofthedocuments
Issue:Arequestionnairessenttoacompanysemployees,includinglowerlevelemployees,by
generalcounselprotectedbyattorneyclientprivilege
Holding:Yes.Incorps.Attorneyclientprivilegeappliestoallemployeesb/cpeopleatalllevels
mayhaveinfothatanattorneyneeds.Saidjustprotectingcommunicationsandnotfacts.
Reasoning:Wrongstandardorattorneyworkproductapplied,shouldappliedopinionnot
ordinaryworkproduct.Wedontknowwhatthestandardis,butwhateveritisitisnotmetin
thiscase.ZoneofsilenceThequestionnairesfilledoutareprotectedbyattorneyclientprivilege,
butthefactscontainedwithinarenot.

29
 CaseImportance:Extendsprivilegetocorporations.Attorneyclientprivilegeistoencourage
opencommunicationwithlawyers.Attorneyclientprivilegedoesnotprivilegefacts,it
privilegescommunications.Inordertogetgoodlegaladviceneedfullandfrankcommunications
betweenclientandtheirlawyer,butwillnotgetfullandfrankcommunicationsiftheclientdoes
nothaveattorneyclientprivilege

o Holmgren(1992)
Reportwouldhavebeencovered,buttheinsuranceclaimwasrejectedandthesubsequentwas
thattheclaimwasrejectedinbadfaithandthepurchaserneedsthepreviousreportfromthe
insuranceadjuster.Courtsaysyeseventhoughitisopinionworkproduct
o Courthastogetaroundthelanguageintherulebysayingthattheadvisorycommittee
notesbehindtherevisiontotherule,itsclearthatthecommitteewantedtoincorporate
whatSCOTUSsaidinHickmanthatSCOTUSleftthequestionopen,courtfelttheyhad
theroomtodisclose(legislativehistory)

o DistinguishingDuplan(1975)
Talkingaboutalawyersopinion,notaninsuranceadjusteropinion.Theopinionisalsofromthe
currentlitigation,notpreviouslitigation
Closertoastraightuplegalopinionfromalawyerinthepresentcase,closeritistoprivilege
WhatSCOTUScasedotheybothrelyuponHickman
Doestheumbrellathiscasecreatescovereveryone?
Probablynotunlessthesepeoplehaverelevantinformation
Ifitisnotatest,itresemblesone
Lowerlevelemployeesmustfitthecriteriasetoutonpage534
Wastheemployeeprivytoinformation?Wastheemployeeactinginthescopeoftheir
responsibility?Etc
Whatdoesinanticipationoflitigation
Courtsaresplit
o Narrowviewisthattheclaimhasbeenfiled
o Broaderviewadoptedby2ndcircuit(NY)hasexpandedittomeanthatthepurposeof
gettinganattorneysadviceistounderstandlegalliability,doesnotneedtobeanofficial
claimhavingbeenfiledaslongasyouareseekinglegaladvice
Seethelitigationloomingonthehorizon,thatresearchwillqualify
o Whatifclaimwasneverbrought?
Howtowaivetheprivilege
o Ifyouputthecommunicationatissue
o Canttakeadvantageofaprivilege,cantakeitawayifitisabusedtoperpetrateacrimeora
fraud(Notarightbecausethecourtisbestowingtheprivilege)
o Waiverpurposefulandaccidental
o Ifyouturnoveraprivilegeddocumentandtoomuchisredactedthecourtmaywaiveallof
it.Documentcannotactasaswordandashield
o Privilegelogforeverypieceofinformationthishastobecreatedtodetailforthecourtand
theothersidewhatthetypeofinfoitis(email,document,etc)thedateonwhichitwas
taken,typeofmaterialthatitdealswith
o Attorneyclientprivilegesurvivesdeath

PRIVILEGES
30
 AttorneyClientandWorkProduct
Bothimpedethesearchfortruth
Provideroomforwhichattorneyscancommunicate

AttorneyClientPrivilege
Elements:
o 1.Communication
o 2.Fromtheclienttothelawyer
o 3.withoutthepresenceofothers
o 4.Forthepurposeofseekinglegaladvice
Goodlegaladvicerequiresfullandfrankcommunicationandwillnotgetfullandfrank
communicationwithpromisethatcommunicationwillbeconfidential
Attorneyclientprivilegecanbewaived
o Crimefraudexception
o Disclosuretoadversariesortothirdpartiesandinadvertentdisclosures
o Partialdisclosure(onlydisclosepartialpartofdocument)waiveprivilegeofwhole
document(privilegecannotbeusedasbothaswordandashieldbyonlygivinginfo
thathelpsyourcasewhileredactinginfothathurtsit)
o Inadequateprivilegelog
o Clientputsthecommunicationatissue:sayingIonlydidthisbecausemyattorney
advisedmetodoit
WorkProductPrivilege
Privilegeisnotabsolute.Willhavetolookatitonacasebycasebasis.
Includesmentalimpressionofattorneyandnotes,memoandrecordoforalquestions.
Factsarenotworkproductprivilege:ifothersidewantstointerviewwitnesses,theycan
OpinionWorkProduct:mentalimpressions
o Willnotknowifthistypeofworkcanbeovercome
o Butitisunfairtohaveattorneysubmittheirmentalimpressionsbecauseitstheirlegal
strategy
OrdinaryWorkProductPrivilegedocumentsandfactualmaterial

31
 o Canbeovercomebyshowingsubstantialneed,withoutunduehardshipandnotable
toobtainsubstantialequivalencebyothermeans(othersbelievethatyoucant
untwinefactsfromthoughtssoitisneveravailable)
o Differentbecauseordinaryincludesfactsthatcanbeoutintheworldthattheother
sidecangetandopinionisinsidetheattorneyshead.Exceptionstowhereyoucanget
theordinaryworkproduct,butnotreallyopinionworkproduct.Rule26Higher
thresholdforopinionworkproductifyoucanevengetitCannotgetmaterialwithout
unduehardship
o Ordinarynotes
PrivilegeandtheGovernment
o Shouldprivilegebemorerobustwhengovernmentisontheotherside,ratherthana
privateparty:Governmenthasmoreaccesstogettingtheinformation
o Shouldhavelessprivilegewhengovernment:Somestrongpublicpolicybehind
governmentsoshouldhavemoreintrusivemeansforgettinginformation

SPOLIATION
Zubulakev.UBSWarburg
Failedtoretainemails,sosheaskedforsanctionsforspoliation
o Courtgrantssanctions,andshiftsattycostsandcostsfordiscoverytoUBS
UBStookalongtimeandcontinuedtodeleteemails
Spoliationwillfuldestructionofevidencenecessaryfordiscovery
o Willfuladverseinferenceinstructionafterthesecondtime
Jurorsuseyourimaginationthinkaboutallthebadstufftheemailscouldve
contained
Issuelitigationhold,directivetoclienttopreserveallinfothatcouldberelevant,continueto
reissuethehold,communicateclearplayersinlitigation,andbackupfiles

III) DISOVERYININTERNATIONALLAW
Whysanctionforserviceofprocessbeingundertreaty,anddiscovery
Sovereignty
Setupacentralauthoritysothatanationisnothavingtheirpowerforcedoncitizensin
anothercountry
Wehavelawsthatconflictandcontradict
Compelledtoactacertainwayunderonelaw,restrictedtoactacertainwayunderanother
law,andyouaresubjecttobothlaws

32
 AbsoluteConflictoflawIncreasingcasesthatUSissuediscovery,butforthemtogivetheinfo
theyfacejailtimeintheirowncountry
Sitandstandatthesametime
Typicallydealtwithbycourtsengaginginabalancingtest
o Whichjurisdictionhasthemostinterestinapplyingthislaw
o InStateA,theyhaveCompellinglawusuallywinssayingthattheirinterestsoutweigh
andviceversa
o Whetheritsaprivateorgovntbringingsuitagainstyouwanttopredictthelawthat
willoverrule
o Geniallythistypeoftransactionisgoodforwelfareandpeace,butifimplementinglegal
regimeinwhichyouaresubjecttomult.contradictorylaws,attimeyouaredecidingyou
havenorealisticexpectationastowhichlawwillapplytoyou,stakesarehigh,whatare
yougoingtodo,asariskadversepersonyouwontengageinproblem
Transnationalactoranddoingbusinessinmultiplejurisdictionsthathavemult.and
contradictoryrulestuckinaimpossiblesituation,cannotobeythelaw
o Vastmajorityarediscoveryissues
o solutionlooktorestatementandwhicheverthestatehasthestrongestinterestin
applyingtheirlaw(almostalwayswhatevercountryyouarein)
o defenseisforeignsovereigncompulsion,comesfromDueprocessclausefairness
doctrine,kindofmovedmoretobalanceofstateinterest
originatedoutofacaseafterWWII
o notabletopredictwhatlawyouaregoingtobesubjectto
o notjustalwaystalkingaboutahorizontalconflictbetweenU.S.andothercountry,but
thenthereisInternationalLawtreatywhentheothercountrysignedonmutuallegal
assistance,doestheinternationallawtrump?IftheUSlawaccuratelyapplies
internationallaw

IV)EDiscovery
Rule26(b)(2)(B)and(C)
StillsubjecttothebalancingtestfoundintheRule(c)(3)
Rule34devotedentirelytoEDiscovery
Enhancedpossibilityofspoliationduetothefrequentwipingclean

33
 SUMMARYJUDGMENT

I) SUMMARYJUDGMENT
Ifapersonhasafrivoloussuitagainstthemwhatcanyoudo
MotionforRule12(b)(6):motiontodismiss
MotionforRule11:moveforsanctions
Summaryjudgmentwasdisfavored:Becauseifpleadingssurvivedthepleadingstage,then
opponentshouldnotbeabletokicktheplaintiffoutofcourt
Purposeistogetpeopleintocourtandtotrial
7thAmendmentrighttoajurytrial:summaryjudgmenttakesthataway
Afewdecadesago,SupremeCourtmovedtomakesummaryjudgmentamoreusefultool.Now
mostofthecasesinvolvemotionsforsummaryjudgment.Usuallybothsideswillmovefor
summaryjudgment.
Redistributionofpowerawayfromjuriesandtojudges
Getpastpleadingstage,onceyougettodiscoveryareallowedtomoveforsummaryjudgment
Differencebetweenpleadingandsummaryjudgment:insummaryjudgmentstageyouare
bringingininformationoutsidethepleading(informationfromdiscovery)
Evenifyoucannotgetsummaryjudgment,partiesstillmotionforitbecause
Findoutwhatinformationthepartyhas
Reallydonthaveanythingtolose
Candelaythetrial(whichcanincreasecosts)
Canpromotesettlement
Cansummaryjudgmentberevisitedonappealaftertherehasbeenatrial
o Ifquestionatsummaryjudgmentstagewasfactual,butifitwassolelyoneoflaw,it
canberevisited
Standardforgrantingsummaryjudgmentisthatnoreasonablejurycanfindinthepartys
favor

34
o Adickesv.S.H.Kress&Co.
Law:inamotionforsummaryjudgment,themovingpartyhastheburdenofshowingthe
absenceofagenuineissueastoanymaterialfact
Facts:Plaintiffhastwomainclaims1.)Saysthatshewasrefusedservicebecauseshewasinthe
companyofblacksmustproveatthetimeofservicethattherewasacustomofrefusingwhites,
wenttotrial,andthecourtdecidednotenoughevidenceasalegalargument.2.)Conspiracy
becausepoliceworkedwiththestoreinarrestinghermustproveanyfactsfromwhicha
conspiracymightbeinferredandthatthestatewasinvolved,dismissedbysummaryjudgment
Issue:InamotionforSJ,doesthemovingpartyhavetheburdenofshowingtheabsenceofa
genuineissueofmaterialfact
Holding:Yes.Thecourtmustviewtheevidenceinthelightmostfavorabletothenonmoving
partyandifthemovantdoesnotestablishtheabsenceofagenuineissue,themotionwillbe
denied.
Reasoning:Inthiscasedidnotmeetitsburdenprovingtherewasnoconspiracy.wasnot
abletoprovetherewasnopolicepresenceinthestoreduringtheincidentwith.Thedidnot
showthereWASaconspiracy,allshehadtodowashaveenoughtocreateagenuineissueof
fact

35
 RULE56(c)
Shownogenuineissueofmaterialfactandyouareentitletojudgmentasamatteroflaw
o Materialfactisonethatgoestothelegalissues
o Agenuineissueisaquestionoffact

TWODISTINCTBURDENS
Burdenofproduction(burdenofproof)whatyouhavetodointermsofbringingforth
evidence(proofshiftburdentoothersidetobringevidence)
Burdenofpersuasionburdentopersuadethecourt/factfinder(willnotshift).Movingpartyon
asummaryjudgmentdecisionwillbeartheultimateburdenofpersuasion

o Celotexv.Catrett
Law:ApartymakingamotionforSJdoesnotneedtoprovideaffirmativeevidenceintheform
ofaffidavitstosupportitsmotion
Facts:WidowofamanwhodiesfromasbestosexposuresuesanumberofcompaniesLotsof
discoveryisdoneandthenthedefendantCelotexmovesforsummaryjudgment.Districtcourt
appliesAdickessayingtherehastobeagenuineissueofmaterialfact.arguesthatCelotexhas
notshownhewasNOTexposedtoasbestosandthatstheburden.
Issue:DoesapartymakingamotionforSJneedtoprovideaffirmativeevidenceintheformof
affidavitstosupportitsmotion?
Holding:No.Rule56(c)doesnotstateaspecificrequirementthatthemovantprovideaffidavits
tosupportitsmotion.Thereforethemovingpartydoesnotneedtoprovideaffirmativeevidence
intheformofaffidavitstosupportitsmotion.
Reasoning:canpointout(doesnothavetocomeforwardwithanyevidence,canjustpointout
thatshedidnotshowhewasincontactwithproduct).RULE56(c):Thecourtsreasoninginthis
casestillappliedwiththenewrulebecauseitsaysifanyaffidavitswhichimpliesthatthere
mightnotbeanyaffidavits,showthatthereisnogenuineissueastoanymaterialfact.Donot
needaffidavitstowininsummaryjudgment.Canpointoutflawintheotherpartysaffidavits.
MaybethatKressdoesnothavetheevidenceandwanttoallowthemtogetsummaryjudgment
basedonherfailuretocomeforwardwithevidence
CaseImportance:CourtelevatessummaryjudgmentbecausetheRulesweredesignedtogetrid
ofhurdlesandtheprimarywaywasimplementingthenoticepleadingstandards,butnowcourt
saysstandardwastoolowsosummaryjudgmentistofulfillthefunctiontokeepoutfraudulent
cases.Allocatedpowertothesincetheycanjustpointoutbecausebearsultimateburden
ofpersuasion
o DoesnotreverseAdickes:Saysburdenonmovingpartymaybedischargedbyshowing
thatthereisanabsenceofevidencetosupportthenonmovingpartyscase.Justshow
thatothersidesevidenceisfaulty.
o ThereisashiftthathappensfromAdickestoCelotex:AttimeofAdickes,summary
judgmentwasasideshow,itwasdisfavoredbythecourts.Celotexmovesittoanintegral
partoftrialprocess.Alloworeuseofsummaryjudgment,saysifcanshowthereisno
genuineissueofmaterialfact,kickoutthecase.
Whataboutpleading,howmightthisbeviewedafterTwomblyandIqbal:
o BalanceeverythingthatRule1talksabout:ajust,speedyandinexpensivedetermination
ofeveryactionandproceeding.
o Howdoyoubalancethat:withthedifferentstagesoftherules
o Noticepleadingregimemadegettingpastthepleadingeasy
 o Becauseitwaseasytogetpastthepleadingstage,willmakeitmoresubstantial
o Sinceyougotpastthepleadingstagewillmakeitmoredifficulttogettotrialandwill
bumpoutcase
o Butnowthebalanceforpleadingisreallyhighnowandthebalanceforsummary
judgment
Ifcannotfindenoughevidence,willgetkickedoutofcourt
ShiftinsummaryjudgmentfromCelotex:Morecomplexcommerciallitigation
MajorshiftawayfromsummaryjudgmentasadisfavoredlegalconcepttonowafterCelotexa
favorofsummaryjudgment.InAdickes,therewasstilladisfavorforsummaryjudgment.
Thiswillmakecasesmoreexpenses.Substantiallyincreasecostsforparties.Theywillnowhave
togathermoreevidencethattheydidnothavetobefore.

StepOneMovantsinitialburdenof StepTwoNonmovantsburdenof
ProductiontoShift productionburdenhasshifted(if
Partymovingforsummaryjudgment initialburdenhasbeenmet)
Movantsinitialburdenofproduction
IfMovant(typically) Comeforwardwithaffirmativeevidence Nonmovingpartymust:
bearsburdenofproofat admissibleattrialshowingnogenuine 1. rehabilitatetheevidence
trial issueofmaterialfact attacked
2. produceadditionalevidence
showinggenuineissueofmaterial
fact
3. moveformorediscovery
56(d)
4. advancenewevidence
Ifnonmovant(typically 1. affirmativelynegateelement sameasabove
)bearsburdenofproof showingnogenuineissueoffact
attrial (Adickies)
2. showpointoutnogenuine
issueofmaterialfact(Celotex)
however,conclusoryassertionsare
notenough
JusticeWhiteconcurringopinion:triestoclarifywhatthecourtmeansbyshowing.Says
conclusionsarenotenough.Mustgothroughothersidesmaterialandpointoutwhatisnot
proofandshowthatthereisnogenuineissueoffact.

BURDENOFPRODUCTION(movingpartyalwaysbearsburdenofpersuasion
Ifinitialpartymeetstheburdenofproductionfromstep1,thentheburdenshiftstononmovantin
step2
Forstep2ofshowinggenuineissueofmaterialfact,cannotrelysolelyonthepleadings
o Needsomediscoverymaterials
o Cannotsaythatyouallegedconspiracy
 o Catrett(reverse&remandofCelotex)
Rule56(e)Summaryjudgmentallowsforevidencenotadmissibleattrial
Rule56(e)(2)partymaynotrelyonallegationsordenials,butitmustshowbyaffidavits
Separately,thefouritemstakenindividuallyprovidelessthanoverpoweringsupportforMrs.
Catrettsposition,theircumulativeeffectissufficienttodefeatthesummaryjudgmentmotion:
Alltheevidencepresentedtogethershowsthereisagenuineissueoffact
Dissent
o Wantsmorewantsproof(specificfacts)thatHoffhasknowledgethatCatrettwas
exposed
o Saysthereisatimingissue,taken2yearstocomeupwithevidence
o Makesthingsmoreexpensive
Courtmustconsidertypeofevidence
TypeofEvidence Showed Admissible?
Mr.Catretts Iwasexposedtofirebar NO
Deposition
HoffLetter SupervisedCatrettininstallingFirebar YES,admissiblehearsaybecause
FirebarproducedbyCelotex Celotexfailedtoobjecttotheevidence
InsuranceLetter RestatesSubstanceofHoffLetter NO,inadmissiblehearsay
Mrs.Catretts StatesthatHoffwilltestify YES,notitselfevidence,butpromise
InterrogatoryAnswers thereisevidence
Purchaseorders ShowthatCelotexsoldfirebarsoldto YES,Admissionby
submittedbyCelotex AnningJohnsonwhileCatrettworkedthere
CelotexInterrogatory Celotexisacorporatesuccessor YES,Admission
Answers
o Matushitav.Zenith
Law:Antitrustcasesrequirespecialanalysisonsummaryjudgment
Facts:

Facts Significance
OligopolyinJapan USlawdoesntextentintoJapan
Inflatedprices andnoinjurytoUScompanies
barrierstoentrybyUS
companies
Japanesecompanieshavehigherfixed Mustoperateatfullcapacity
costs
Plantscapacityexceededneedsof Mustexportexcess
Japanesemarket
AgreementswithTradeMinistry MayactuallyhelpUScompaniesbecause
checkprices(cannotpricebelowa theJapanesecompaniescantgobelowa
certainpoint) certainprice
FiveCompanyRule Tendtokeeppricesup,notdown
Undercuttingcheckpricesviarebate
scheme

Issue:wasthereenoughevidencetoprovetherewaspredatorypricingintheUS?
Holding:No.Zenithmustshowtwocomponents:(1)thatnotonlydidthedefendantsenterinto
anillegalconspiracy,butalsothatZenithwasinjuredasaresultofthatconspiracy;and(2)there
mustbeatrueissueoffactthatcreatesagenuineissuefortrial.hadnorationaleconomic
motivetoconspire,andifconductisconsistentwithotherequallyplausibleexplanations,the
conductdoesnotgiverisetoaninferenceofconspiracy
Reasoning:
o Items15makeitreasonablethatdontinjureUScompaniesmakesitreasonabletoassume
thatthelastpieceofevidenceiscolludedbetweenthecompaniesaswell
o Noproofofpredatorypricing
o Whereareweatthispointinoursummaryjudgmentchart?
Burdenhasshiftedbecausethemovingpartyhasmetitsinitialburdenofproduction
AndtheUShastocomeforwardwithevidencethattherewasaconspiracy
USneedstohaveenoughevidencetogotoajuryareasonablejurycouldfindfora
nonmovingparty
 Differencebetweenreasonableinferenceandunreasonableinference
OnmotionforSJ,thenonmovingpartyisentitledtoreasonableinferencesin
itsfavor
Whatisunreasonableinferencemustlookatunderlyinglawforantitrust
andthepolicybehindthatlawforpredatorypricing
2competingtheoriesofwhatishappeningnudgeoverpossibletoplausible
o atpleadingandSJstage,itfallsonthepartythathastheburdenof
proofattrialtoprovethatwhattheyareclaimingistheactualthing
thathappened
o courtthinksthatbyeconomictheoryitisimplausible
predatorypricingschemesarespeculativebyloweringpricessothatatsomefuture
pointyoudriveoutthecompetition
problemisthatyoumustmaintainthemonopolylongenoughtogetthemoneyback
andgainprofit
complainingtheyareloweringprices,thatiswhatwewant
Dissent:
o Majority:goodthingthatpricesaredropping
WhydoesitmakeeconomicsensetopricepredatorilyinUS?
AssumptionunderlingmajorityopinionthatJapanesemanufactureswillfavor
profitmaximization>growth,butitmaybeanerroneousassumption
o maybelongtermgrowth>profitmaximization
USmanufacturersarebeing
IfnooligopolyinJapankeepingpriceshigh,theywouldbecompetingagainst
eachother,andmoreTVsetswouldbesoldinJapanandnotexportingthem
toUS
o ChargingmoreinJapanandlessinUS
Ifhavemorecertainty,cangotoaninvestorandgetmore$$sinceyouhave
agreements,predictable

o Andersonv.LibertyLobby
Law:Acourtshouldconsidertheevidentiarystandardwhendecidingamotionforsummary
judgment
Facts:lobbygroupsuesamagazineb/citpublishedarticledepictingLibertyLobbyandits
founderasneoNazi.Libertysues,questioniscantheyshowthatInvestigatoractedwithactual
malice.1stAmendmentthatwhenapublicationpublisheddefamatoryinfohadtohaveactedwith
actualmalice.Toshowactualmalice,havetoshowthatdefendantactedwithrecklessregard.
Havetoshowactualmalicewithclearandconvincingevidence.
 Issue:UnderLibel,1stAmendmentrequiresyoushowtheothersideactedwithmalice,did
Libertyshowwithclearandconvincingevidencethathadknowledgethestatementwasfalse?
Holding:No.
CaseImportance:SCOTUSdrawsparallelbetweenSJandDirectedverdictbysayingthat
timingistheonlydifferenceandtheyarethesame.***Thedeterminationofwhetheragiven
factualdisputerequiressubmissiontoajurymustbeguidedbythesubstantivestandardsthat
applytothecase.Thisistrueatboththedirectedverdictandsummaryjudgmentstates
Normalstandard:Jurymustbeabletoreasonablyfindfortheplaintiffbyapreponderanceofthe
evidencethattheplaintiffisentitledtoaverdict.Inthiscase:hastobeonclearandconvincing
evidence.Heightenedevidentiarystandardfordirectiveverdict.Ifcannotshowmalice,then
summaryjudgmentcanbegrantedagainstthem
o Dissentsaysthiswillforcethepartiestocomeforwardwithalloftheirevidencepaper
trail.Nowhavecourtweighingtheevidence
o Majorityclaimsnottoweightheevidence,theyarejusttakingalloftheevidenceand
lookingatitinalightfavorabletononmovant(nottakingcaseawayfromjury)
o Whymaketheclearandconvincingevidencethresholdforsummaryjudgment:
Argumentthatwillhavetoprovideclearandconvincingevidenceattrial,sowhynotget
itoverwithnow.Willhavetomakesamejudgmentattrialifdoesnotprovideclearand
convincingevidence,sonotdoatsummaryjudgmentstageandgetitoverwith
 DECISIONMAKERS
I) THEJURYTRIAL
Jurytrialrightprotectedbythe7thAmendmentintheConstitutionandreflectedinRule38
o Statejuriesarenotconstrainedbythefederalmodelsincethe7thAmendmentjurytrial
rightdoesnotapplytothestates
Rareeventsincivilcomparedtocriminal
Possibilityofjurytrialtendstomotivatesettlementdiscussions
Rule48governstheamountofjurors(between6and12)
Partiescanstipulatetofewerjurors
Righttoajurytrialcanbewaved
Whereyoucangetajurytrialcandeterminewheresuitsarefiled
Moderntimeshavecriticizedjurytrials,lotsoftime,jurydecisionsaren'tgood(inefficient)
o USistheonlycountrythathasaciviljury
o Mostpeoplethatwanttodoawaywiththemoncivilsidedonotforcriminal
proceedings
Publiclawstatetakesoverclaim
Criminalaboutpublic/communitymorals
Privatelawcontracts,torts,property,etc.
Wantjuriesstandingasshieldbetweenprivate/public
o MotionChronologically
SJ:beforetrial
Judgmentasmatteroflawalsocalleddirectedverdict:attrial,eitherorbothatcloseofother
partiescaseoratthecloseofallevidence
Renewedjudgmentasamatteroflawalsocalledjudgmentnotwithstandingtheverdict(JNOV):
afterjuryreturnstheverdict

o Curtisv.Loether
Law:TheSeventhAmendmententitleseitherpartytodemandajurytrialinanactionfor
damagesunderTitleVIII
Facts:Thelandlorddefendantwantsajurytrialandtheplaintiffdoesnot.Theplaintiffisa
youngwomanwhohasbeendeniedhousingandissuingundertheCivilRightsAct.
Issue:DoesheSeventhAmendmententitleseitherpartytodemandajurytrialinanactionfor
damagesunderTitleVIII?
 Holding:Yes.The7thAmendmententitleseitherpartytodemandajurytrial
Reasoning:Previouslyestablishedthatthe7thAmendmentallowsajurytrialinactionsbasedon
statutesifthestatutecreateslegalrightsandremediesthatareenforceableincourts;whichisthe
casehere.
CaseImportance:Petitionersaysthatyoudonothavearighttoadministrativeandbankruptcy
procedures.WaltersCase:didnotwanttobringinlawyersbecauseitwouldmakeadministrative
proceedingsmoreexpensiveandlonger.Notinadministrativehearingsbecauseajurytrial
wouldslowthingsdown.Notinbankruptcycourtseitherbecausetheyarecourtsofequity
(distinctionbetweencourtoflawandequity).Butinordinarylegalactions,7thAmendment
guaranteesrighttoajurytrial.

EQUITYVSLAW

o TwoProngTest
Historicalanalogy
Whatformdoesremedycomein?(damages,pecuniary)
o Ifmoneydamagesitlookslegal
o Backpayequitable
o Distinctionbetweenlawandequity:
o inEngland2setsofcourts;law/commonlawandequity
o 1938withFRCPlawandequityweremerged
o Differentremediesforeach
o Equity:specificperformance,makingorstoppingpeopleformdoingthings.Can
onlyberetainediflawwasinadequate.Remedyagainstpersonofanother
o Commonlawactions:remedyagainstpropertyofanotherperson,recoverfrom
propertyofanother
o Examples:
Ifcontractsuitandissueisspecificperformance:equitable,nojury
Damages:legal,jury
Reformationofcontract:equitable,nojury
Nuisance:damages,legal,jury
 o BeaconTheatresv.Westover
Law:Whenlegalandequitableissuesexistinthesametrial,thelegalissuesmustbefirst
resolvedbyajurybeforetheequitableissuesmayberesolvedbythejudge
Facts:Foxhasexclusiverights(clearancerights)torunfirstmoviesandBeaconopensatheater
threatingfoxbysayingthattheclearancecontractisaviolationoftheShermanAntiTrustAct.
FoxwantsdeclaratoryjudgmentsayingitdoesntandfilesantisuitinjunctiontokeepBeacon
fromfilingclaimbothequitable.Beaconfilescounterclaim(Rule13becausetheyhavetobring
itatthesametime)seekingdamageslegal.Beaconwantsajurytrial.
Issue:IsBeaconentitledtoajurytrialwhentherearebothequitableandlegalissuesinthesame
trial?
Holding:Yes.Legalandequitableissuestogetherandtheypartytimelyasksforajurytrialthey
deserveajurytrial.Notabsolute,someopportunitieswhenyouhaveyourequitabletrialfirst
whentherewillbeirreparableharm.
Reasoning:Thedeclaratoryjudgmentactdoesntgetridoftherighttoajurytrial.Thelegal
issueswillbeheardbyajuryandtheequitableissuesaftersolvedbyajudge

o Markmanv.WestviewInstruments
Law:Thecourt,becauseofitstrainingincomplexissuesandknowledgeofwrittendocuments,
ismorecompetenttocorrectly,fairly,anduniformlymakedecisionsrelatingtotheinterpretation
ofatermofart
Facts:andhaveverysimilarcontrolsystem.Court(judge)foundnoninfringement.
believesthejuryisthebesttohearcase
Issue:Inapatentcase,istheinterpretationofatermofartaquestionreservedforthejudge,not
subjecttothe7thAmendmentguaranteetoajurytrial
Holding:Yes.Itisajudgequestionbecausejudgesaremoreefficientandcompetent
Reasoning:Suitsinpatentlawhavetypicallybeenincommonlawandwhatisdeservingofthe
protectionisuptojuries,butwhatthescopeofthepatentitselfisasubsidiaryquestionthatgoes
toajudge.Nohistoricalanalogy,noremedy,sothecourtlooksatFunctionalconsideration;
whichleadsSCOTUStobelievethatjudgesaremoreequippedfromtraininganddisciplineto
giveaproperinterpretation.Alsouniformitysothatinnovatorsknowwhattheywillget.Worried
aboutexperts.
CaseImportance:Redistributionofpowerfromdistrictjudgestoappellatejudges.Watering
downrighttojurytrial?Worriedabouttruthandassumejudgeswillbebetterthanjuries?

II) MANAGINGTHEJURY
Generalverdictliable/notliableanddamagesamount
SpecialVerdictsetofquestionsthatthejuryanswerswithspecificanswers

JURYVERDICTS

RULE49
Ifageneralverdictandthespecificanswersareconsistentnoproblem,canenterjudgment
Ifinconsistencyoccurs,itmatters:
o Ifinconsistentwithgeneralverdict,butthespecificanswersareconsistentwitheach
othercanenterjudgment,ordernewtrial,ortelljurytokeepdeliberating
o Ifspecificanswersareinconsistentwitheachotherandthegeneralverdictcannotenter
judgment,mustordernewtrialortellthejurytokeepdeliberating
Whyprovideforspecialverdicts?
o Dontknowonwhatbasis(theory)thejurydecidedthecase
 o Afraidofjurynullification
o Someevidencecanberegardedasinadmissibleanddontknowwhatthejurywasrelying
on
o Generalverdictsdonthaveuniformityforimportantdecisions

o Gallickv.Baltimore&OhioRR
Law:Thecourtmustattempttoreconcilethejurysfindingsbeforeitmaydisregardthejurys
specialverdictandremandthecaseforanewtrial.
Facts:Thejuryfoundthattherailroadwasnegligent,buttheninspecialverdictQ21and22the
jurysaysthatitwasnotforeseeable
Issue:Canacourtattempttoreconcilethejuriesfindings(mistakes)
Holding:Yes.Thecourtmusttrytomakeafairreadingoftheverdict,andifthereisalogical
waytoreadtheverdict,thecourtmustattempttodoso
Reasoning:Poorquestioning,alltheyneededtoknowwascouldthepersonhavebeenbitten
bythebug.Questionsdontaccuratelyreflectthelaw.Evidencethejurysimplymisappliedthe
termreasonablyforeseeable.Heldthatmostsensiblewaytoviewjuryfindingsistofindthat
theRRwasnegligent
Dissent:Accusesmajorityofforcingconformitybyviolentmeans

TAKINGCASEAWAY:JMOL

RULE50
Directedverdict=JMOL
JudgmentNotwithstandingtheVerdict(JNOV)=RenewedJMOL
o Betterreflectsthefactthatitsthesameanalysisthecourtengagesinduringthesummary
judgmentstagecouldareasonablejuryfindforthepartythatwonbasedonthe
evidence
mustmakemotionforJMOLBEFOREthecasegoestothejury
o concludesevidencemovesforJMOL
(Morecommon,justhastopointout,hastocomeupwithaffirmativeevidence)
o concludesevidenemovesforJMOL
(hadnoticeandopportunitytobeheard)
o closeofallevidenceeitherparty/bothcouldmoveforJMOL
whatifmakesmoveafterevidencebutforgottoattheclose?Canyoustillmakemotionfor
renewedJMOL
o usedto,no
o nowyoucan(since2006)earliermotiongaveyounotice
JudgesuaspontehaspowertomoveforJMOL
o Evenifattorneysdontbringmotions,judgecanrule
o Judgemustprovenoticeandopportunitytorespond
o Stillmusthavebeenamotionbeforetrialwenttojury
andyoumustmakeaJMOLinordertorenewJMOLcantgobackandrevisitthemotion
whyisithardertoprevailifyoubeartheburdenofproofattrial?
o cantpointtoanabsenceofevidenceontheothersidemustcomeupwithaffirmative
evidencethatthejurycouldnthavefoundfortheotherside
o Gallowayv.UnitedStates
Law:AdirectedverdictdoesnotviolatetheSeventhAmendment
Facts:wasinthemilitaryandclaimedtoexperienceseverepsychologicalproblemsasaresult
ofthetimeheservedinFrance.laterappliedfortotaldisabilitybenefits,butwasnotgranted
full.wifefiledsuiteanddistrictcourtgrantedUSmotionfordirectedverdict
Issue:Doesadirectedverdictviolatethe7thAmendment?
Holding:No.Courtmustviewevidenceinthelightmostfavorabletothe,drawingall
reasonableinferencesinhisfavor;however,theinferenceofthe8yeargapisnotbelievable.

Reasoning:crazydoesnthidefrompeopleseyes.Noevidencehewasunstableinthe8years,
circumstancesaretoogreat.Burdenisontoprovehewascrazy,govntcanjustpointoutthe
factthattherewasnoevidence
7thAmmendmentArgumentthatdirectedverdictviolatesthe7thamendmentbecauseitsaysyou
areentitledtoajurytrial
o basedonhistorydirectedverdictdidntexist,itisanewprocedure
o iftestistolookbackandseewhatwashappeningwhenitwaswritten,thiswasntthere
howevertherewerestillanumberoftoolshowthejudgecouldtakethecaseaway
fromthejury
newtrialcangivetoanotherjury
nonsuitbothwithoutprejudiceandcanbringtheclaimagain
o voluntarywithdrawsthecase
o involuntary
demurreroftheevidenceisadmittingthatthealleged,butsaysthatitis
legallyinsufficient
o SCTOUSsaysthatthe7thamendmentissupposedtoevolveandtheproceduresevolve
o purposebehindthelaw
o originalism
originalpublicmeaning
originalintent
Dissent
o thinkpeoplewanttogetridofthejurytrial
o 7thamendmentissupposedtoprotectpeoplefromjudicialoverreachingandthatiswhat
isgoingtohappen
o Reevesv.SandersonPlumbing
Law:Aplaintiffsprimafaciecaseofdiscrimination,combinedwithsufficientevidencefora
reasonablefactfindertorejecttheemployersnondiscriminatoryreasonforitsdecision,is
adequatetosustainafindingofliabilityforintentionaldiscrimination
Facts:broughtsuitagainstformeremployeeclaiminghewasfiredonlybecauseofhisage.
claimthattherewereotherreasons(errorsandmisrepresentations)forthefiringof
Issue:Isaplaintiffsprimafaciecaseofdiscrimination,combinedwithsufficientevidencefora
reasonablefactfindertorejecttheemployersnondiscriminatoryreasonforitsdecision,is
adequatetosustainafindingofliabilityforintentionaldiscrimination
Holding:Yes.Inthiscase,itisclearthatSandersonwasnotentitledtoajudgmentasamatter
oflaw.Reevespresentedsufficientevidenceforthejurytofindhewassubjecttoagebased
discrimination
Reasoning:Use3prongburdenshiftingfromDouglas
o Reevesmustshowthathewasfiredbecauseofhisage(ageactuallymotivatedthe
employer'sdecision)
o challengeisthattheemployerhasthisinformation,andtheremightnotbedirect
evidence
tryingtogettothementalprocesses
o theburdenofpersuasionstayswiththefortheENTIREtrial
o 1.hastoestablishaprimafaciecase(showheisamemberofaprotectedclass,is
qualified,wasfired,andthecompanyhiredyoungerpeopletofilltheposition)
initiallymeetsthisburden
o theburdenshiftsandthemustprovewasfiredforalegitreasoncomesbackwith
evidencethathewasdoingabadjob(failurestodo.)
metthisburden
o hastoshowthatreasonisjustapretextfordiscriminationhesaysthesaidthings
regardinghisage,andlowercourtsaidthattheevidencewasnottrue,thereforeshowing
thatitmightbeapretextfordiscrimination,buthecouldnotshowthatagewasthe
reasonthathewasfired
Primafaciecase()legitimate,nondiscriminatoryreason()pretextfordiscrimination()
o SCOTUSsayswronganalysis
tookintoaccountanincompletevaluationoftheevidence
Ct.ofAppealsshouldhavelookedattheevidenceasawhole
Ct.ofAppealsdidntviewinferencesastrue/infavorof
ifthejurycouldmakeacredibilitydeterminationthatthewasnot
credible,thecourtmustmakethatsamedetermination
mustknowwhattheunderlyinglawis
 JUDGESPOWER

o Walkerv.CityofBirmingham
Law:Aninjunctionissuingoutofacourtofgeneraljurisdictionwithequitypowersmustbe
obeyed,howevererroneoustheactionofthecourtmaybe,andthepropervenuetochallengethe
injunctionisthroughthecourts
Facts:
o Cityfiledaninjunctiontostopthepetitionersfrommarching
o Thepetitionersviolatedtheinjunctionandheldincontemptofcourt
o PetitionersappealtoAlabamaSupremeCourtandcourtupholdsthecontempt
o ThepetitionersthenappealtoUnitedStatesSupremeCourt
o April3:Hendricksappliesforpermit
o April5:TelegramfromCommissionerConnorsayingthathealonecannotissuethe
permit,musthaveentireCommission
o April10:Connorfilesbillofcomplaintwiththecourtandobtainsaninjunction
TRO,temporaryrestrainingorder
Temporarilyrestrainsthemfrommarching
Obtained9pmexparte:withouttheothersidepresentA
o April11:petitionersreceiveinjunction
Hadpressconferenceandsaidwilldisobeyit
Hadmeetingandsaidwilldisobeyit
o GoodFridayandEasterSunday,April14:March
o Monday,April15:Contempthearing
Petitionerschallengetheinjunctionclaimingthatitisunconstitutional
Petitionerschallengetheordinanceaswell
o Courtrejectsthechallengesandsaysdoesnotneedtoaddressifinjunctionsare
unconstitutional
o Needtodecideiftheyjurisdictiontoissuethetempinjunctionandwhetherpetitioners
violatedinjunction
o AlabamaCircuitCourtagreedandsentencedthemtofivedaysinjailand$50fine
o SupremeCourtofAlabamaaffirmed
Issue:Whendoyouallowproceduretotrumpsubstance?
Holding:Notinthiscasewouldleadtoalotofpeopleignoringrules,thereisareasonforthe
lawssetinplace
Reasoning:
o Petitionersargueordinanceisunconstitutional
FacialChallenge:statuteonitsfaceisunconstitutional
Deniesrighttofreespeech
Thecommissionistodecidewhocanpicketandwhocannotpicket
Butthereisnostandardintheordinancebecauseitgivesthecommission
completediscretionatwhocanpicketormarchandwhocannot
AsAppliedChallenged:waythestatutewasappliedtothemmadeit
unconstitutional
Normallythepermitsweregrantedbyjusttheclerkandnottheentire
commission
Alsoallothergroupsweregrantedrighttopermitinthepast
o Petitionersargueinjunctionisunconstitutional
Injunctiondoesnotallowthemmarchanditlooksjustliketheordinance
 Ordinanceispreventsthemfromexpressingtheirviewpointbecauseitdoesnot
likewhattheyhavetosay
FirstAmendmentprotectsthisrightandgovernmentcannotstopthemfrom
speakingjustbecauseitdoesntlikewhattheyhavetosay
Violatemorallawofuniverse:anunjustlawisnolawatall
o Thepetitionersclaimsareallsubstantive:theyclaimthattheirsubstantiverightshave
beenviolated
o Majoritydoesnotarguesubstantivelawthough
CollateralBarRule:Eveniftheinjunctioniswrong,youhavetoobeyituntil
yousuccessfullychallengedit
Cannotattackonappeal
Havetoobeytheinjunction
Ifyouthinkitswrong,thenchallengeit
Butcannotdisobeytheinjunctionandthenbeheldincontemptandthen
challengeit
Standinghavebeeninjuredbythelaw
o Courtsaysitisnotthequestionthatinjunctionandordinanceisunconstitutional,should
havechallengeditfirstorshouldhaveappliedforapermitagainfromthecommission
o CourtsaysiftheyhadtriedtochallengeitinAlabamacourtsandwereignored,thenthey
wouldhavebeenabletogoandviolateit
o StandingtoSue:havetobeinjuredbythelawinordertosueandinordertobeinjured,
violatethelawandthencansue
o Whydifficulttochallengeconstitutionalityofinjunctions:
Injunctionisdifferentbecauseitwasmadeforoneparticularcase
Itstemporaryandpartyspecific
o Courtsshouldhavesometypeofcontrol
o Needorderlyadministrationofthelaw,donotwantpeoplegoingoutviolating
injunctionsandthenchallengingthem
Resultwouldbejudicialtyranny
o Injunctionmakesunconstitutionalordinancebindingonthepetitioners
o Thefactthattheinjunctionwasexparteissketchybecauseitdidnotgivepetitionersdue
processornotice
Dissent:
o UsesGreencase:courtdoesnothavepowertoissueinjunctionsonconstitutionalmatters
Caseinvolvesthe1stAmendmentandrighttofreespeechwhichisafederalissue
Legislaturehasnopowertopassunconstitutionalstatutesandcourthasno
jurisdictiontoissueunconstitutionalinjunctions
Saysthisisstateaction
CourtsinAlabamaaredeprivingsomeoneofconstitutionallyprotected
rightswithoutdueprocess
o Inordertobringacaseaboutunconstitutionalitytherehastobeinjury,inthiscasethey
werethrowninjail
Forstatuteshavetobeinjured
Judicialinjunctioncantbeinjured,havetofollowit