UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE SCHOOL OF LAW. Spring 2019

Similar documents
Civil Procedure I Fall 2015, Professor Sample

CIVIL PROCEDURE A SPRING 2008 SYLLABUS Professor Chon

ELON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I SYLLABUS

UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE SCHOOL OF LAW SPRING Capital Punishment and the Constitution Seminar LAW 871 (3 credits)

Fundamentals of Federal Income Tax II LAWT/957/491; TAXA/678/185; LAW/957/512. Room assignments are available through MyUB.

Civil Procedure Fall 2018, Professor Sample Office: Law School Room 215

CIVIL PROCEDURE II SEC. 1 SYLLABUS

Civil Procedure Fall 2017, Professor Sample

Civil Procedure: Course Requirements and Syllabus Professor Lonny Hoffman (Fall 2012)

CIVIL PROCEDURE PROFESSOR ANGA

LLM Criminal Law and Procedure Professor Jose F. Anderson Spring 2018 Semester Day. Tuesday, Thursday 3:00-4:15pm

Computers: Students may use laptops in class. They will NOT be able to access their notes when they use the laptop for their final exam.

Room 432 (in clinic suite; entrance is through the second floor clinic reception area)

LAW THE SECOND AMENDMENT, THE LANDSCAPE FOR EFFECTIVE GUN CONTROL, AND HOW WE GOT HERE. James B. Astrachan, Esq.

Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday at 3:00 in Classroom B

UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE SCHOOL OF LAW FALL 2014 SYLLABUS August 16, Course Instructors:

UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE SCHOOL OF LAW FALL 2015 SYLLABUS July 31, Course Instructors:

LLM Civil Procedure Angelos Law Room 403 Fall 2013

When an action is commenced in U.S. district court, the court must determine the substantive law and rules of procedure that will govern the action.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

University of Baltimore School of Law Spring 2019

CIVIL PROCEDURE CASES, MATERIALS, AND QUESTIONS. Sixth Edition

CONSTITUTIONAL CRIMINAL PROCEDURE I Professor Nancy S. Forster Fall 2017 Semester

Civil Procedure II. Spring 2011

SYLLABUS CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - ADVERSARY SYSTEMS (LAW 6112) Spring Semester 2017 Professor Kenneth Nunn

CIVIL PROCEDURE I WAGGONER FALL , Office 418 SYLLABUS OVERVIEW OF THE COURSE

CIVIL PROCEDURE CRN 95665/LAW 1700-C Fall 2018 Professor Matthew A. Shapiro

CIVIL PROCEDURE II SECTIONS 1, 3 and 4 Professor Swank Spring Semester 2012

Table of Contents. I. Introduction

FEDERAL COURTS COURSE INFORMATION Fall, 2012 Professor Beyler

Supreme Court of the United States

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

SYLLABUS CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - ADVERSARY SYSTEMS (LAW 6112) 3 credits Fall Semester 2017 Professor Kenneth Nunn

Choice of Law Provisions

Civil Procedure Fall 2018 University of Georgia School of Law

Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Supreme Court of the United States

Expansion Of Personal Jurisdiction Over Foreign Suppliers

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA. Case No Civ-COOKE/TURNOFF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE May 31, 2013 Session

Animating Civil Procedure

N.Y.U. Journal of Legislation and Public Policy Quorum

Civil Procedure Fall 2016 University of Georgia School of Law

Case 4:18-cv ALM Document 1 Filed 11/15/18 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1

Supreme Court of the United States

Personal Jurisdiction After Bristol-Myers Squibb: Unresolved Issues, Shifting Plaintiff Strategies

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES -- GENERAL

PSC : Civil Liberties Spring 2013 Tuesday and Thursday, 2-3:15 pm Graham 307

American Legal History Course Information and Syllabus University of Baltimore School of Law Spring 2017

UNDERSTANDING CIVIL PROCEDURE. Fifth Edition

PERSONAL JURISDICTION IN TOXIC TORT CASES. Personal Jurisdiction is frequently an issue in mass toxic tort litigation.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Supreme Court of the United States

Case: 1:13-cv DCN Doc #: 137 Filed: 03/02/16 1 of 13. PageID #: 12477

Civ Pro Outline. 1. Historical development of the minimum contacts test. 2. Modern elaboration of the minimum contacts test

THE MUDDY-BOOTED, DISINGENUOUS REVOLUTION IN PERSONAL JURISDICTION. Patrick J. Borchers*

Conflict of Laws - Characterization of Statutes of Limitation - Full Faith and Credit for Statutes

Case5:14-cv EJD Document30 Filed09/15/15 Page1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION

Invitation To Clarify How Plaintiffs Prove Class Membership --By David Kouba, Arnold & Porter LLP


Supreme Court of the United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. herself and all others similarly situated, ) ) ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S Plaintiff, ) )

USDS SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC#:

Supreme Court of the United States

Criminal Law Professor Donald Stone Fall Semester Day 2017 Day: Tuesday & Thursday 3:00-4:15pm

In The Supreme Court of Virginia

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO. : O P I N I O N - vs - 7/20/2009 :

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY INTRODUCTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-503-DJH-CHL

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, (Argued: September 10, 2008 Decided: November 19, 2008)

Case 2:11-cv CMR Document 9 Filed 04/04/12 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Changing Course* Sergio J. Campos** I. INTRODUCTION

PUBLISH TENTH CIRCUIT. Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. No PENSKE TRUCK LEASING CO., L.P.,

1 See Austin L. Parrish, Sovereignty, Not Due Process: Personal Jurisdiction over Nonresident

2017 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1

ESSAY APPROACH. Bar Exam Doctor BAREXAMDOCTOR.COM. CIVIL PROCEDURE FEDERAL CIVIL PROCEDURE CALIFORNIA CIVIL PROCEDURE

S. ll IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES A BILL

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 93-CV-425. Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia

PHILLIPS PETROLEUM CO. v. SHUTTS ET AL.

CIVIL PROCEDURE PROFESSOR ANGA

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I LAW 650 SECTION 339 SPRING 2017 PROF. PETERS. SYLLABUS (version 1 dated 12/01/16)

Case 1:14-cv DPW Document 35 Filed 06/17/14 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 196 Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan Public Schools Educating our students to reach their full potential

United States District Court

Supreme Court of the United States

Case 1:09-cv NMG Document 19 Filed 04/29/2009 Page 1 of 13. United States District Court District of Massachusetts MEMORANDUM & ORDER

BY SHEILA A. SUNDVALL, CHRISTOPHER F. ALLEN, & SUSAN E. JACOBY. I. Introduction. Background

INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION ( ) Monday & Wednesday, 9:00-10:15 a.m. Room G20 office: Room 319

Seminar in American Politics: The U.S. Supreme Court GVPT 479F Fall 2015 Wednesday, 2:00 4:45pm, 0103 Jimenez Hall

USDC IN/ND case 3:05-md RLM-CAN document 2030 filed 04/21/10 page 1 of 6

BATTLING FEDERAL QUESTION REMOVAL. Robert L. Pottroff. to the. Journal of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America. April 2006

The Supreme Court's Personal Jurisdiction Reckoning

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

DePaul Law Review. DePaul College of Law. Volume 11 Issue 1 Fall-Winter Article 11

H. R. ll IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES A BILL

SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION

Transcription:

UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE SCHOOL OF LAW Spring 2019 I am not one of those who think that procedure is just folderol or noxious moss. Procedure the fair, orderly and deliberative method by which claims are to be litigated goes to the very substance of the law. Cook v. Cook, 342 U.S. 126, 133 (Frankfurter, J., concurring). Course: Civil Procedure II, Section 601-412 Instructor: Jack Lynch Office: 410-837-4629 Home: 301-962-3414 Email: jlynch@ubalt.edu Days/Times: Mon./Weds. 6:15 7:30 Course description: This course includes the topics of federal subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, venue, choice of law in federal court actions based on diversity jurisdiction, former adjudication, mandatory joinder, interpleader, intervention and class action. The course focuses mostly on federal law, but Maryland law on some topics will be explored. Course materials: Only one book is required, Understanding Civil Procedure by Gene R. Shreve, et al. (6 th ed., 2019). You should be able to get it used. We are going to have to read many cases. They are listed on the syllabus. There will be links to such cases on the TWEN site for this course. The listing corresponds to classes listed by date on the syllabus. Student learning outcomes: Most of the material in this course is some of the most difficult that you will encounter in law school. Concerning subject matter jurisdiction, you will be expected to master the most common bases of federal jurisdiction so that you will be able to determine whether a case may be brought and maintained in (or removed to) federal court. You will be expected to be able to determine was to what issues state or federal law must be applied to suits in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. You will be expected to be able to select an appropriate forum within the federal and Maryland system and to determine whether it is constitutionally fair to compel the defendant to defend a suit in such forum. You will be expected to assess the effect of a judgment on further litigation of the same claim or issues. You will be expected to master how modern joinder rules have increased consolidation of litigation of claims and when they do not do so. Grading: The final grade will be based on the final exam. There will, however, be two practice essay exams during the semester. The questions on such practice exams will take a form similar to questions on the final exam. The exams will be graded, but the grades will not count. The purpose of the practice exams is to provide some indication of student progress in grasping and applying course material as well as to provide practice for the final exam. I will also from time to time spend class time to distribute multiple choice questions pertaining to the subject matter. After students answer such questions we will discuss what the correct answer is and why. This is also to provide an indication of student 1

comprehension of the material and to practice for the multistate bar exam, which now includes questions on civil procedure. Course expectations: ABA standards call for 2 hours of work outside class for each hour per week in class. I have tried to limit assignments to a reasonable amount of reading for class, but some of this material is quite difficult and may require more time to master. If you have difficulty with the material at any time while you are reading it, please do not hesitate to email me to ask questions about it. I will get back to you as soon as possible. Law school should be one time when you do not have to face difficult issues alone. Attendance: Students who miss more than 5 class meetings may be required to withdraw from the course with a grade of FA, or may be precluded from taking the final exam. Course website: This course uses a TWEN site for posting materials. You are responsible for enrolling on this site at the beginning of the semester. Computers: Many law school professors think that use of laptops is a terrible way to take notes in a law school class. They are probably right. But you are adults and you are paying to keep the lights on in the building. Therefore, I defer to you as such; use laptops if you like. Class cancellation: It is winter and this is not Alaska. We may have cancellations. If there is inclement weather, please visit the University of Baltimore website or call the Snow Closing Line at 410-837-4201. Academic integrity: No cheating allowed! The Law School s Honor Code may be found at http://law.ubalt.edu/academics/policiesandprocedures/honorcode/. Title IX Sexual Misconduct and Nondiscrimination Policy: The University of Baltimore s Sexual Misconduct and Nondiscrimination policy is compliant with Federal laws prohibiting discrimination. Title IX requires that faculty, student employees and staff member report to the university any known, learned or rumored incidents of sex discrimination, including sexual harassment, sexual misconduct, stalking on the basis of sex, dating/intimate partner violence or sexual exploitation and/or related experiences or incidents. Policies and procedure related to Title IX and UB s nondiscrimination policies can be found at http://www.ubalt.edu/title ix Disability policy: If you are a student with a documented disability who requires an academic accommodation, please contact Karen Schulz, at 410-837-4623 or kschulz@ubalt.edu 2

Date Subject Reading 1-7 Subject matter juris. Shreve, pp. 90-99; U.S. Const., art. III, 2 (on your phone); 28 U.S.C. 1331; Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678 (1946); Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. Mottley, 211 U.S. 149 (1908). 1-9 Subject matter juris. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc. v. Thompson, 478 U.S. Fed. qtn., Diversity 804 (1986); Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering & Mfg., 545 U.S. 308 (2005); Shreve, pp. 115-28; Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77 (2011). 1-14 Diversity Shreve, pp. 100-12; Kramer v. Caribbean Mills, Inc., 394 U.S. 823 (1969); 28 U.S.C. 1332; Snyder v. Harris, 394 U.S. 332 (1969); 28 U.S.C. 1332 (d). 1-16 Subject matter juris. 28 U.S.C. 1441, 1447; Shreve, pp. 128-33; Shamrock Removal, suppl. Juris. Oil & Gas Co. v. Sheets, 312 U.S. 100 (1941); 28 U.S.C. 1367; Shreve, pp. 133-51; United Mine Workers v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 720 (1966). 1-23 Suppl. Juris. Revere Copper & Brass, Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Surety Co., 426 F. 2d 709 (5thCir. 1970); Owen Equip. & Erection Co., 437 U.S. 465 (1978); Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah, 545 U.S. 546 (2005). 1-28 Erie Shreve, pp. 143-73; Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938); Palmer v. Hoffman, 308 U.S. 208 (1939); Klaxon v. Stentor Electric Mfr. Co., Inc., 313 U.S. 487 (1941); Guaranty Trust Co. v. York, 326 U.S. 99 (1945). 1-30 Erie Byrd v. Blue Ridge Rural Elec. Coop., Inc., 356 U.S. 525 (1958); Hanna v. Plumer, 380 U.S. 460 (1964). 3

2-4 Erie Shady Grove Orthopedic Assocs., P.A. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 559 U.S. 393 (2010). 2-6 Personal juris. Shreve, pp. 19-28; Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714 (1877); Burhnam v. Superior Court, 405 U.S. 604 (1990); Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457 (1940); Mullane v. Central Hanover Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306 (1950). 2-11 Personal juris. Shreve, pp. 28-38; International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945); Mc Gee v. Int l life Ins. Co., 355 U.S. 200 (1957). 2-13 Personal Juris. Md. (Cts. & Jud. Proc.) Code Ann., 6-103 (b) (1)-(6). First practice exam 2-18 Personal juris. Shreve, pp. 38-49; Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235 (1958); Shaffer v. Heitner, 433 U.S. 186 (1977); Worldwide Volkswagen v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286 (1980). 2-20 Personal juris. Shreve, pp. 49-68; Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operation v. Brown, 131 S. Ct. 2486 (2011); J. McIntyre Mach, Ltd. v. Nicastro, 131 S. Ct. 2780 (2011); BNSF Ry. Co. v. Tyrell, 137 S. Ct. 1549 (2017). 2-25 Venue 28 U.S.C. 1391; Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235 (1981). 2-27 Venue Shreve, pp. 131-42; Md. (Cts. & Jud. Proc.) Code Ann. 6-201, 202, 203; Leung v. Nunes, 729 A. 2d 956 (Md. 1999). 3-4 Res judicata Shreve, pp. 457-74; Restatement (2d) of Judgments The claim 17, 18, 19, 24, 25 (on TWEN); Rosenstein v. Hynson, 147 A. 529 (Md. 1929); Kent Cty. Bd. of Educ. V. 4

Bilbrough, 526 A. 2d 232 (Md. 1987); DeLeon v. Slear, 616 A. 2d 380 (1992). 3-6 Restatement (2d) of Judgments 22, 27, 29; Rowland v v. Harrison, 577 A. 2d 51 (Md. 1990); Murray Int l Freight Co. v. Graham, 555 A. 2d 502 (Md. 1989). 3-11 Collateral estoppel Shreve, pp. 474-95; Bernhard v. Bank of America, Defensive 122 P. 2d 892 (Cal. 1942); B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Industries, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 1293 (2015). 3-13 Collateral estoppel MPC, Inc. v. Kenny, 367 A. 2d 486 (Md. 1977); Defensive Pat Perusse Realty Co. v. Lingo, 238 A. 2d 100 (Md. 1968). Second practice exam 3-25 Collateral estoppel Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, 439 U.S. 322 (1979); Offensive Garrity v. Md. St. Bd. of Plumbing, 135 A. 3d 452 (2016). 3-27 Mandatory joinder Shreve, pp. 241-48; FRCP Rule 19; MRP Rule 2-211; Provident Tradesmen s Bank & Trust Co. v. Patterson, 390 U.S. 102 (1968). 4-1 Mandatory joinder Haas v. Jefferson Nat l Bank, 442 F. 2d 394 (5thCir. 1971); Mahan v. Mahan, 577 A. 2d 70 (Md. 1990); Stewart v. Tuli, 573 A. 2d 109 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1990). 4-3 Interpleader FRCP Rule 22; 28 U.S.C. 1335, 1397, 2361; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Dunlevy, 241 U.S. 518 (1916); State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Tashire, 386 U.S. 523 (1967). 4-8 Intervention Shreve, pp. 255-58; FR Rule 24; MR Rule 2-214; 5

Montgomery Cty. v. Bradford, 691 A. 2d 1281 (Md. 1997); Hartford Ins. Co. v. Birdsong, 519 A. 2d 219 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1987). 4-10 Class actions Shreve, pp. 259-69; FR Rule 23; Hansberry v. Lee, 311 U.S. 32 (1940); Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011). 4-15 Class actions Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1977); Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 U.S. 156 (1974). 4-17/22 Review 6