San Joaquin College of Law
Civil Procedure – Final Exam 2008 / Cartier
Time: 2 hours 40 minutes
Question 1 [50 points]
Patient, a citizen of Indiana, was seriously injured while giving himself a medically prescribed injection when the pre-filled syringe broke. Glass and metal pieces were embedded in the tissue near the injection site. Within the time permitted by the state statute of limitations, Patient filed suit in federal court in Indiana against Midwest Medicinals, Inc, a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Michigan, as identified on the medication’s packaging material. After the statute of limitations expired, Patient learned that in 2007 Midwest Medicinals was purchased by Drug, Inc. The summons and complaint had been served at the old Midwest Medicinals headquarters which continues to be occupied by Drug, Inc., a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Illinois. Patient also learned that the syringe was actually manufactured by International Injection, Ltd. (“Inject”), a Canadian corporation that sends its product to pharmaceutical companies in Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan. Investigation also revealed that another plaintiff recently obtained a judgment against Drug, Inc. and against Inject in an Indiana state court for injuries sustained when the same model of syringe broke resulting in similar injuries. Before any responsive pleading was filed, Patient filed an amended complaint 1) to change the name of Midwest Medicinals to Drug, Inc., to reflect the current ownership of the business and 2) to state a claim against Inject. Both defendants have filed 12(b) 6 motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim since the action is barred by the state’s statute of limitations. Patient has filed a summary judgment motion on the issue of liability invoking collateral estoppel and asserting that the prior state court judgment precludes the defendants from contesting the issue of liability.
How should the court rule on the following motions:
1. Drug, Inc.’s motion to dismiss? DISCUSS.
2. Inject’s motion to dismiss? DISCUSS.
3. Patient’s motion for summary judgment based on collateral estoppel? DISCUSS.
Question 2 [50 points]
Pat, a citizen of Pennsylvania, sustained personal injuries as a result of an elevator accident at an Atlantic City casino in New Jersey. Pat filed suit against the casino owner and operator, Casino, a New Jersey corporation that maintains its only place of business in that state, and against Mylon Elevator Service that is owned and operated by Mike Mylon, a citizen of New Jersey. The suit claims special damages of $25,000 for medical bills and lost wages plus an unstated amount for general damages including pain and suffering. After being served in New Jersey in a manner permitted by state law, the defendants removed the case from the Court of Common Pleas to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, approximately 75 miles from where the casino is located. Casino regularly advertises in various media in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Approximately 25% of Casino’s business is derived from citizens of Pennsylvania. Mylon Elevator does absolutely no business outside of New Jersey but Mike owns a cabin in upstate Pennsylvania where he frequently goes to hunt and fish. After the case was removed, Mike filed a motion to dismiss the suit against him for want of personal jurisdiction. Casino filed a motion 1) to dismiss the action based on improper venue since the cause of action did not arise in Pennsylvania or 2) in the alternative, to transfer the case to the federal court in the Southern District of New Jersey where the cause of action arose.
1. Was the case properly removed? DISCUSS.
2. How should the court rule on Mylon’s motion to dismiss for want of personal jurisdiction? DISCUSS.
3. How should the court rule on Casino’s motion
A) to dismiss based on improper venue? DISCUSS
B) to transfer the case to New Jersey? DISCUSS.
Question 3 (Bonus) [5 points]
Briefly but fully explain when it is appropriate for a federal judge to grant a new trial.
San Joaquin College of Law
Civil Procedure – Final Exam 2008 Issue Chart Q1
ERIE – state law claim in federal court
state substantive law and federal procedures
statute of limitations generally treated as substantive (York)
if an FRCP is on point – apply FRCP (Hanna)
Drug’s motion to dismiss – 12(b)6 = failure to state a claim
Patient seeks to amend pleading after s/l expired
Relation back – explained
R. 15 allows relations back (to change the name of a party) if
knew of the suit
knew it was the intended party
Not prejudiced in having to defend
/ if served within 120 days
Inject’s motion to dismiss.– Did Inject know of this suit ?
/application
Pat’s motion for summary Judgment – defined
Issue Preclusion
Same issue
actually litigated
essential to the judgment
Mutuality – “full and fair opportunity to litigate”
Here offensive non-mutual collateral estoppel
Court may allow if not unfair
TOTAL ____________
San Joaquin College of Law
Civil Procedure – Final Exam 2008 Issue Chart Q2
1. Removal from state to fed ct
if could have been brought –smj
federal courts have limited j
Fed Q or DIVERSITY
complete diversity: P = PA; D’s = NJ
amount in controversy >75K
:application
2. Motion to dismiss for want of Personal J/
PJ defined
statutory prong: notice and Long arm statute
constitutional prong: mc and fairness
No business contacts– no contacts, ties or relations
ownership of cabin – quasi in rem but Shaffer
3. Casino motion to dismiss
VENUE – define
general rule – where D resides if . . . or where c/a arose
special rule for removal
TRANSFER – one fed ct to another
1404 – convenience of parties, witnesses or interest of justice
1406 – if venue improper may dismiss or
Transfer to where case could have been brought
1631 – if lack of jurisdiction – may transfer if justice so requires
/Application
TOTAL ____________
QUESTION 3
Against the weight of the evidence
Newly discovered evidence . . .
Prejudicial error + objection
Misconduct
Excessive Damages