For Wednesday

Friday audio--Section A, Section B.  Essay # 7 due on Wednesday. Essay # 8 will post on Wednesday, due on Wednesday, April 16.

Two quick words on removal with multiple defendants in § 1446(b)(2).

    • Section (b)(2)(A) imposes unanimity--all defendants must agree to remove. But note that this is limited to defendants who have been joined. If ∆1 is served on June 1, it can remove without ∆2's consent if ∆2 has not been served.

    • Section (b)(2)(B) gives each defendant 30 days from service to remove (to file or join a Notice of Removal). But what happens if the defendants are not served at the same time, often months apart--what if ∆1 is served on June 1 and ∆2 is served on August 15 (past the time that ∆1 could remove)? Congress enacted (b)(2)(C) in 2011 and adopted the "Last-Served Defendant" Rule: The last-served defendant has 30 days to remove; any earlier-served ∆ can consent to that removal, even if his own 30 days to remove have lapsed. So in the example above--∆2 has 30 days from August 15 to remove; ∆2 can consent to that removal, although it no longer can join.

Move to Personal Jurisdiction. Before doing anything, read Preliminaries of Personal Jurisdiction blog post for background. Then prep all of Shift to Minimum Contacts, including Glannon pp. 93-100Read and prep all of World Wide Volkswagen. Review FRCP 12(h)(1).

    • How can each party consent or submit to a court's jurisdiction? 

    • How does Shoe change the standard for personal jurisdiction? When can a court exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant?

    • What is general personal jurisdiction, what is specific personal jurisdiction, and how do they differ? Look at Shoe and Daimler on this.

    • What is a "Long Arm Statute?" Why call it that?

    • How does the PJ analysis in federal court compare with the PJ analysis in state court? See FRCP 4(k).

    • Consider two cases. For both, review the removal statutes and piece together the removal process to understand how it will work in the case:

        1) A (TX) sues X (NY) for defamation Texas state court; the amount in controversy exceeds $ 75,000. You are X's attorney. You do not believe X is subject to personal jurisdiction in Texas. Your forum preferences, in order, are: 1) anywhere other than Texas; 2) federal court in Texas (if stuck in Texas); 3) state court in Texas (where he now is). As X's lawyer, what is your procedural strategy to obtain the most preferable forum?

        2) World Wide:

            Robinson (NY) sued Audi (a German company), Volkswagen of America (the US subsidiary, a NJ corporation with PPB in NJ), World-Wide Volkswagen (the regional distributor, a NY corporation), and Seaway (local dealer, a NY corporation). Robinson sued in Oklahoma state court. Audi and VWA are subject to PJ in Oklahoma, but prefer federal court. How can they make that happen?

            Also, Robinson and his family were driving through Oklahoma as part of a permanent move from NY to Arizona; Robinson had a new job and the family planned to stay in Arizona permanently. Why is Robinson a NY citizen?

    • How does World Wide adjust the two pieces of the Shoe standard and how do the two connect? How does a defendant establish "certain minimum contacts?" How can a defendant "purposefully avail?" In what way(s) did WW and Seaway, perhaps, purposefully avail?

Personal Jurisdiction Preliminaries

On Wednesday, we jump into into Personal Jurisdiction with International Shoe in 1945. But there is some background and about 70 years of stuff before Shoe. For purposes of time, this post provides basic background on civil litigation and personal jurisdiction prior to Shoe. Before reading the material assigned for Wednesday, read this post in conjunction with Glannon pp. 69-71 and these pages from Glannon's prior edition (he removed this material from the current edition, but has given permission to share the old pages).

For Thursday

Wednesday audio--Section A, Section B. Essay # 7 has posted. Essay # 8 will post on Thursday.

Review Supplemental Jurisdiction.

    • If VOA is also from Massachusetts, there is no supplemental jurisdiction over the hypothetical old contract claim. But what about the actual state claims over the 2012 BSO season?

    • Ford (p.457) says § 1367(a) reaches the limits of Article III. What does that mean?

     • What is the connection between § 1367(a)'s standard and the standard for joinder in FRCP 13(a), (b), and (g); 14(a), and 20? There are 3 logical possibilities--what are they and which does Jones adopt? What does that mean for the counterclaim in Jones? What about the counterclaim in Kinsmann ((review our discussion of that from Responsive Pleadings).

    • Does § 1367(b) apply in Godin? What are the "jurisdictional requirements" of § 1332?

    • § 1367(b) identifies 3 categories of cases in which there is no supplemental jurisdiction. What do they have in common? Does § 1367(b) limit supplemental jurisdictional in the following (assume joinder is proper in all):

        • Metta wants to file a crossclaim against Nicely.

        • A (IA) v. X (NE). X (NE) impleads M (IA). A wants to file a claim against M.

        • A (FL) v. X (NY) and Y (FL) 

        • A (NJ) & B (DE) v. Walmart (DE/AR).

                (See also the discussion in Glannon (p.270) on this problem, especially as to the amount in controversy)

Then move to Removal. Read the assigned statutes (§§ 1441, 1446, and 1447) and map out the process for removal--when and how it functions and what the parties must do. What is the effect of filing a notice of removal? What is not required for a defendant to remove? What happens then? What is the timing for removal?

    • What is the logic of the "Forum Defendant Rule" of § 1441(b)(2)? 

    • A, Inc. (IL/IL) sues X, Inc. (PA/PA) in state court in Pennsylvania. The day after filing, X removes to federal court. Under § 1441(b)(2), is removal proper?

Essay # 7 (Sec. A)

Download Regular Type; Download Large Type; and after the jump. Due next Wednesday, April 9.

Two things in handling this case:

1) Math is required, as you must calculate time periods and number of dayss. You may use this site, which allows you to calculate the number of days between two dates.

2) You have pieces of deposition testimony and pieces of Affidavits. The Affidavit paragraphs are numbered. Each question and corresponding answer in the Dep is number (Q1 + A1; Q2 + A2; etc.). Be specific in what you cite to.

Pay attention to the role you are told to play.

Essay # 7 (Sec. B)

Download Regular Type; Download Large Type; Read after the jump. Due in class next Wednesday, April 9.

You have excerpts of an Affiadvit; the paragraphs are numbered. You have excerpts of a Deposition; the questions and corresponding answers are numbered (Q1 + A1; Q2 + A2; etc.). Please cite to evidence and be specific.

Pay attention to the role you are told to play.