Any 2Ls/3Ls want to post prepared civ pro answers???

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
kcg171
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:54 am

Any 2Ls/3Ls want to post prepared civ pro answers???

Postby kcg171 » Fri Dec 03, 2010 8:44 pm

Is anyone who did well in civ pro using prepared answers for issues you knew would be on the exam willing to share some good ones?

User avatar
Gatriel
Posts: 2015
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:30 pm

Re: Any 2Ls/3Ls want to post prepared civ pro answers???

Postby Gatriel » Fri Dec 03, 2010 10:41 pm

I assume issue statements? I'll post what I have thus far:


- Rule 8
o Rule 8(a) Rule Statement – When filing a complaint Rule 8(a)(1) of the FRCP requires a short plaint statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction and Rule 8(a)(2) requires a short plain statement of the claim showing the pleader is entitled to relief, and Rule 8(a)(3) demanding relief sought.

- Rule 11
o Sanctions Rule 11 - Rule Statement - Sanctions under Rule 11 of the FRCP a lawyer must make a reasonable prefiling inquiry into the legal and factual bases of his or her case before filing a pleading, motion, or other paper with the court. The lawyer’s signature on the paper is a certificate that the lawyer has conducted such an inquiry and has reasonable concluded that the case has merit. If the lawyer fails to conduct such an inquiry or files a court paper to harass an opponent, then the curt is required to impose sanction on the attorney. Upon being served with a Rule 11 notification, the non-moving party that is the attorney potentially being sanctioned has 21 days to respond to the sanction. The bench can sanction the attorney as well. Sanctions can include attorneys fees incurred by the opposing party in defending against the frivolous pleading or motion.
- Rule 12
o Subject Matter Jurisdiction Rule Statement for 12(b)(1) – Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and can only hear cases that have significant federal questions, cases under diversity of citizenship or cases where congress has granted specific statutory jurisdiction.
• Diversity Cases –
• Basic Add on: Diversity jurisdiction exists where there is complete diversity between the parties AND the amount in controversy exceeds $75k, exclusive of interest and costs. Diversity determined by the parties domicile at the time the suit is filed.
• Individuals add this: Individual’s citizenship is based on domicile.
• Partnerships add this: Considered to be a collection of individuals, so the citizenship of each of the members of a partnership must be considered.
• Corporations add this: Corporations have two places of citizenship: their state of incorporation and their principle place of business. If the principle place of business is hard to determine, courts can use the nerve center test of the place of activities test but this is a question of fact.
• Permanent Resident Aliens: Under 1332 permanent resident aliens are considered a domiciliary of the state they live in.
• Federal Question Cases
• Basic Add on: Under 1331 the federal district courts have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the constitution, laws, or treaties of the US. The courts use the Motley well pleaded complaint rule to determine if the plaintiff bring a federal claim and not just a federal issue. This rule stipulates that the first complaint must state the federal law claim, and that is can’t be a federal issue, and can’t anticipate a federal law defense.
• Federal Statute Violation add this: If the plaintiff is claiming a violation of a federal statute, the statute must have an express private right of action. The federal claim must be raised in plaintiff’s complaint. With a federal claim, all the elements of the prima facie case have to come from federal law and federal law has to have the ability to give a remedy based on the federal claim.
o Dismiss for lack of Personal Jurisdiction 12(b)(2) – The 14th Amendment provides the measure of, and limits on the exercise of personal jurisdiction (PJ) by state courts over non-resident defendants (D). PJ can be satisfied with consent, domicile, presence, status, or minimum contacts (MC) (International Shoe). Minimum Contacts test requires that 1) D have purposeful activities within the state and 2) P’s claim must relate to D’s purposeful activities. If both tests are satisfied then the court has specific jurisdiction. IF only the first prong of the test is satisfied, then there is general jurisdiction, appropriate when D’s activities are so substantial and continuous that they would expect to be sued there on any claim and would suffer no inconvenience from defending there. In BOTH general and specific jurisdiction, D must have purposefully availed himself to the laws of the forum state enough to reasonable anticipate being hauled into court there. In addition the exercise of PJ over the D cannot offend the traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice (Reasonableness test). This test weights the burden on the defendant P’s interest the forum state’s interest, the interstate judicial system, and interstate policy interest. The constitution sets the out limits for PJ so after establishing constitution requirements, the claim must also be authorized under the particular states’ Long Arm statute. LAS can either be full reach (in which the out limits that are determined by the constitution are also the outer limits of the statutory jurisdiction) or specific act which define the acts that will subject a party to personal jurisdiction in that state. If D did not act within the state, there still may be sufficient minimum contacts under the effects test. When D has no purposeful acts in the forum state, but when P’s injury was sustained there courts look at 4 elements 1) D committed something leading to a cause of action 2) the act leading to the cause of action was committed outside the forum state by D 3) D’s act caused harm to P inside the forum state and 4) D targeted P in the forum state. To determine 4 look at profit motive and D’s knowledge of P.
• Product Manufacturer Add This – For product part manufacturers there are two tests, the stream of commerce test, in which the D knows that the product in which their part has been added is being shipped to the forum state, and the stream of commerce “plus” test, in which the D has to have more purposeful acts directed to the forum state.
• Corps Add this – When dealing with corporations, the minimum contacts test includes looking at the state in which the corporation is incorporated, the state in which the corporation has its principle place of business, and the state where the company has substantial business activity.
o Dismissal for lack of property venue 12(b)(3) – Venue limits the judicial district in which P can bring a claim. For diversity cases the federal state of 1391(a) provides that venue can be brought in either 1) district where defendant resides if all defendants reside in the same district 2) a district where a substantial part of the events or omission giving rise to the suit occurred or if neither 1 or 2 are satisfied then 3) any district where D is subject to PJ.
• Corporations add this -- For venue purposes, a corporation that is a defendant is deemed to reside in any district in which is it subject to PJ at the time the action commended. IF there is not district with PJ over the corporation then the district with the most significant contacts can be used.
• Transfer of Venue for Convenience – IF venue is improper under 1406 venue can be dismissed or transferred. If venue is property under 1404(a), the case can be transferred to a more convenient forum that also has PJ and venue property. Venue can be transferred under section 1404(a) to a more convenient forum whant 1) the courts in the new forum would have originally been proper for venue and personal jurisdiction 2) it is the interest of justice to transfer it and 3) when the convenience of the parties, witnesses and evidence points to the new forum as being more convenient. Courts have considerable discretion over transfer and look at both private and public factors to permit transfer in the interest of justice.
o Dismissal for insufficient process 12(b)(4) –
o Dismissal for insufficient service of process 12(b)(5) –
o Dismissal for Failure to State a Claim 12(b)(6) – Rule 12b6 outlines a motion by D that challenges legal sufficiency of P’s Rule 8(a) claim. It is an alternative to answering the complaint. Tule 12b6 applies when P has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Therefore if P failed file in the correct jurisdiction, please all the elements of a prima facie case, or claim specific relief, a Rule 12b6 motion would dismiss the original claim. Court assumes truth of the facts alleged by P views the issue in the light most favorable to P and tests their sufficiency under the relevant substantive law.


- Rule 56
o Motion for Summary Judgment – Summary judgement should only be granted in cases where there is no genuine issue of material fact and where the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In making a MSJ the proponent has the burden of informing the court that a party is unable to meet their burden and identifying the portions off the pleading which demonstrate an absence of genuine issue of material fact. Under Celotex the burden stays with the party that would have the burden of proof at trial. Here, that would be the (P or D) who is required to meet the burden of proving that there is no genuine issue of material fact. Both parties can submit affidavits signed under oath or other admissible evidence to meet their burden. IF the moving party makes a sufficient showing then the nonmoving party must respond with counter affidavits or other discovery materials. Evidence should be viewed in favor of the non-moving party.
- Rule 84
o Rule Statement – Any complaint may be in conformity with Rule 84 of the FRCP.

User avatar
kcg171
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:54 am

Re: Any 2Ls/3Ls want to post prepared civ pro answers???

Postby kcg171 » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:05 pm

I was thinking more like answers ready to apply the facts of whatever hypo the professor gives, but this is good, too.

I guess some people say having prepared answers doesn't work, but others say it does, so I'm preparing mine for the stuff I know will be there, especially for civ pro.

User avatar
Nom Sawyer
Posts: 933
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 1:28 am

Re: Any 2Ls/3Ls want to post prepared civ pro answers???

Postby Nom Sawyer » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:08 pm

ooh this is a decent idea for take homes... I have a bunch of 8 hour take home exams too. i'll see if I can find any things to add

User avatar
kcg171
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:54 am

Re: Any 2Ls/3Ls want to post prepared civ pro answers???

Postby kcg171 » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:31 pm

Nom Sawyer wrote:ooh this is a decent idea for take homes... I have a bunch of 8 hour take home exams too. i'll see if I can find any things to add


that's the spirit!

I'd add my stuff, but I'm stupid and a 1L, so I don't think it would be helpful :oops:

User avatar
Gatriel
Posts: 2015
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:30 pm

Re: Any 2Ls/3Ls want to post prepared civ pro answers???

Postby Gatriel » Fri Dec 03, 2010 11:39 pm

kcg171 wrote:I was thinking more like answers ready to apply the facts of whatever hypo the professor gives, but this is good, too.

I guess some people say having prepared answers doesn't work, but others say it does, so I'm preparing mine for the stuff I know will be there, especially for civ pro.


Agreed, some stuff you know will be on there.

12b6 and 56 stuff. Prepared stuff before hand it always a good thing.

User avatar
kcg171
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:54 am

Re: Any 2Ls/3Ls want to post prepared civ pro answers???

Postby kcg171 » Sat Dec 04, 2010 8:40 am

anyone?

User avatar
GATORTIM
Posts: 1214
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 3:51 pm

Re: Any 2Ls/3Ls want to post prepared civ pro answers???

Postby GATORTIM » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:10 am

Bump...just in case any 2L/3L wants to give a 1L the answer you worked hard to formulate during an exam you studied your ass off for so that us 1L's can slack off and do something else with the time you spent studying. This would be just great :roll:

User avatar
kcg171
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 4:54 am

Re: Any 2Ls/3Ls want to post prepared civ pro answers???

Postby kcg171 » Sat Dec 04, 2010 9:21 am

umm, ok. i would, but whatever. And obviously we are all working hard to write our own, but it would be helpful to see how successful people wrote theirs to see if ours are up to par.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher, Yahoo [Bot] and 6 guests