Lecture 3 – Rules of Civil Procedure

.docx

School

Bryant and Stratton College, Buffalo *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

120

Subject

Law

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by dms62795

PLEG120 - Lecture 3 – Rules of Civil Procedure Lesson 1 – Jurisdiction and Venue Introduction Congratulations on your work through the first two lectures! You should now have a better understanding of our client and their case. Now we will focus on determining what and where to file, both in terms of geography and ensuring we select a court with the authority to hear the type of case we present. We will start by examining federal courts and the types of issues that belong there before shifting to state courts and issues of venue. Once we determine if we should move forward in state or federal court, we will take a look at the rules of procedure and court structures. Once we nail down issues of state or federal court, we will ensure we prepare the proper pleadings and serve them properly on the necessary parties. We will again need our client to assist us in preparing the pleadings, so communication remains a critical component of the paralegal’s work. We will take a look at how to prepare ourselves and our client for the answer and any motions and counterclaims with which the defendant may come back at us, and ensuring we prepare the best and most accurate pleadings we can survive until our client gets their day in court. Federal Jurisdiction and Venue The federal court system is designed primarily to determine issues that arise from federal law, the United States Constitution, and resolve disputes that arise between states. Federal courts have jurisdiction over cases involving:  the United States government,  the Constitution or federal laws, or  Controversies between states or between the U.S. government and foreign governments. For instance, a claim by an individual to receive money under a federal government program such as Social Security, a claim by the government that someone has violated federal laws, or a challenge to actions taken by a federal agency might all be heard in federal court (US Courts, n.d.). Federal courts also have jurisdiction over all bankruptcy cases, naturalization ceremonies, and issues that arise before the specialty courts, as will be discussed shortly. Because of the limited powers given to the federal government by the states in the Constitution in Article One, Section Eight, it

PLEG120 – Lecture 3 - Jurisdiction and Venue 2 stands to reason that most issues that come up between citizens are issues relating to state laws. To begin a civil lawsuit in federal court, the plaintiff files a complaint with the court and “serves” a copy of the complaint on the defendant. The complaint describes the plaintiff’s damages or injury, explains how the defendant caused the harm, shows that the court has jurisdiction, and asks the court to order relief. A plaintiff may seek money to compensate for the damages or may ask the court to order the defendant to stop the conduct that is causing the harm. The court may also order other types of relief, such as a declaration of the legal rights of the plaintiff in a particular situation (US Courts, n.d.). A case originates in the trial courts, known as the US District Courts. The nation’s 94 district or trial courts are called U.S. District Courts. District courts resolve disputes by determining the facts and applying legal principles to decide who is right. Trial courts include the district judge who tries the case and a jury that decides the case. Magistrate judges assist district judges in preparing cases for trial. They may also conduct trials in misdemeanor cases. There is at least one district court in each state, and the District of Columbia (US Courts, n.d.). If one party is not satisfied with the outcome of their case, they can appeal the decision to the Court of Appeals, known as the Circuit Courts. There are 13 appellate courts that sit below the U.S. Supreme Court, and they are called the U.S. Courts of Appeals. The 94 federal judicial districts are organized into 12 regional circuits, each of which has a court of appeals. The appellate court’s task is to determine whether or not the law was applied correctly in the trial court. Appeals courts consist of three judges and do not use a jury. A court of appeals hears challenges to district court decisions from courts located within its circuit, as well as appeals from decisions of federal administrative agencies. This map demonstrates the breakdown of the circuits by color, and the small dashed lines indicate the districts within each circuit.

PLEG120 – Lecture 3 - Jurisdiction and Venue 3 ( Geographic Boundaries: of United States Courts of Appeals and United States District Courts ) Should a matter be considered of national importance or necessary to resolve a conflict of laws between circuits or states, the United States Supreme Court selects a very small number of cases each year to resolve for the entire country. Constitutional Issues in Federal Courts The issues that arise from the Constitution that require the federal courts to resolve them are varied and change along with the times. “The Constitution of the United States is a carefully balanced document, designed to provide for a national government sufficiently strong and flexible to meet the needs of the republic, yet sufficiently limited and just to protect the guaranteed rights of citizens; it permits a balance between society’s need for order and the individual’s right to freedom (Supreme Court, n.d., para. 4).” The complex role of the Supreme Court in this system derives from its authority to invalidate legislation or executive actions which, in the Court’s considered judgment, conflict with the Constitution. This power of “judicial

PLEG120 – Lecture 3 - Jurisdiction and Venue 4 review” has given the Court a crucial responsibility in assuring individual rights, as well as in maintaining a “living Constitution” whose broad provisions are continually applied to complicated new situations (Supreme Court, n.d.). Issues like slavery, segregation, the right to vote, and free speech are examples of issues where the federal judiciary was tasked with determining what the authors of the Constitution in 1787 would have intended the country to need over 200 years later. These are important issues that reflect the changes to the world examining issues that the Constitutions authors could not have imagined, such as technology, science, and cultural shifts that come both suddenly and over decades. Diversity as a Reason for Federal Jurisdiction In addition to constitutional questions, Congress also gave the federal courts the authority to hear cases that arise from diversity jurisdiction, which requires a two-prong test to determine if the parties belong in federal court. Diversity jurisdiction in federal court exists when two conditions are met. First, the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000. Second, all plaintiffs must be of different citizenship than all defendants. When diversity jurisdiction exists, a defendant may remove an action from state court to federal court by filing a notice of removal, but because federal courts are of limited jurisdiction, and there is a strong presumption against federal-court jurisdiction, the party moving for federal jurisdiction must demonstrate clear evidence that diversity exists (Cafferty, 2019). This can become a complicated question, but typically the court requires complete diversity between all parties, meaning a plaintiff should be certain they have identified all necessary defendants prior to filing so there are no surprises later about the address of an essential defendant breaking the diversity. Specialty Courts and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure There are also several courts with limited jurisdiction over very specialized subject matters. The Court of International Trade addresses cases involving international trade and customs laws, while the U.S. Court of Federal Claims deals with most claims for money damages against the U.S. government (US Courts, n.d.). Federal courts also have exclusive jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases involving personal, business, or farm bankruptcy meaning a bankruptcy case cannot be filed in state court. (US Courts, n.d.) Congress also created several Article I, or legislative courts that do not have full judicial power. Judicial power is the authority to be the final decider in all questions of Constitutional law, all questions of federal law and to hear claims at the core of habeas corpus issues. Article I Courts are:  U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

PLEG120 – Lecture 3 - Jurisdiction and Venue 5  U.S. Tax Court (US Courts, n.d., para. 15) In addition to ensuring the courts have jurisdiction over the issue and the venue is correct, parties must also look to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to ensure a case is properly filed. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure govern civil proceedings in the United States district courts, and their purpose is “to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding (US Courts, n.d.).” These rules specify everything from acceptable fonts, formatting, and the content of pleadings, timelines, and every other aspect of the case. There are separate rules of evidence, criminal procedure, appeals, and bankruptcy, so a vigilant paralegal will need to prepare to ensure the proper rules are utilized in each case. Lesson 1 Completed! Thank you! You have completed this lesson. Please scroll down to complete a short, ungraded Knowledge Check activity. Check Your Knowledge Drag and Drop: Which of the following are federal courts? Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Yes) Family Matters Court (No) Bankruptcy Court (Yes) Court of Federal Claims (yes) Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (yes) Tax Court (yes) Real Property Disputes of America (no) Lesson 2 – State Jurisdiction Introduction Although the federal court system is vast and important, the majority of lawsuits take place under state law and in the state courts. This lesson will walk us through ensuring that, even within the state system, the case is filed

PLEG120 – Lecture 3 - Jurisdiction and Venue 6 in the right court to ensure jurisdiction and venue are achieved. Once those principles are met, there are still procedural rules and court structure concerns to clear. Basis for State Jurisdiction Just like on the federal side of the system, a state court has no authority to decide a case unless it has jurisdiction over the person or property involved. To have jurisdiction, a court must have authority over the subject matter of the case and  the court must be able to exercise control over the defendant,  Or the property involved must be located in the area under the court’s control. (ABA, 2021, para. 1) Certain actions are transitory—meaning they can be brought wherever the defendant may be found and served with a summons and where the jurisdiction has sufficient contact with one of the parties and the incident that gave rise to the suit (ABA, 2021). Typically, it is regarded as fair to sue a defendant where they do business, or live, or attend school or work; the premise is that if you go somewhere regularly, it is fair that you be subject to the laws and courts where you go. Other actions are local, like a case related to real estate and tied to that property and can be brought only in the county where the subject of the suit is located (ABA, 2021). Venue refers to the county or district within a state or the U.S. where the lawsuit is to be tried. The venue of a lawsuit is set by statute, but it can sometimes be changed to another county or district if required for fairness to a party or the convenience of a witness (ABA, 2021). Venue Rules While there may be more than one location where the lawsuit can be filed, there are rules in place to ensure that the defendant being sued is treated fairly. New York, for example, had a venue law for years that simply required that one of the parties to the case reside in the county where the suit was to be brought. But to make the forum more appropriate, the law was changed in 2017 to expand venue options. The language in bold was added: Except where otherwise prescribed by law, the place of trial shall be in the county in which one of the parties resided when it was commenced; the county in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred ; or, if none of the parties then resided in the state, in any county designated by the plaintiff. A party resident in more than one county shall be deemed a resident of each such county (Fassuliotis, 2020). These venue rules are meant to be fair to the defendant while still giving the plaintiff some opportunities to forum shop, perhaps to avoid bad publicity or

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help