Top Law Schools

I feel the most lost for this class. I feel as if I know nothing. The E&E's help a lot but I still get lost whenever the professor comes up with a hypo.

Also is it just me or is civpro almost all rules and almost no relevant cases?

Civ pro is indeed a lot of rules, but many of them use language that is interpreted by the cases, which is why the cases are important. However, Some rules don't really have seminal interpretive cases, but just good cases which demonstrate the rule. These cases are less important. When you're reading the rules, try to think of what they actually mean for the parties involved. Civpro is more exciting when you think about how each side can use the rules to his/her advantage.

Also, try out Freer's civ pro supplement. I found it much more helpful than the E&E. To be honest, Glannon's E&E only touches the surface of a lot of topics, which my professor wanted much more detailed knowledge of.

Half of Civ Pro is primarily statutes and the other half is primarily cases. When covering Jurisdiction, the vast majority of the rules are derived from cases. When covering other topics (complaint, motions to dismiss, summary judgment, jmol, etc) the vast majority of the rules are derived from statutes.

That helps. My school 1st semester civpro doesn't cover personal jurisdiction.

It's more like pretrial, amendments, trial, discovery, judgments etc. So is it normal that I'm not finding many if any cases that important?

johansantana21 wrote:That helps. My school 1st semester civpro doesn't cover personal jurisdiction.

It's more like pretrial, amendments, trial, discovery, judgments etc. So is it normal that I'm not finding many if any cases that important?

Cases are not important when covering the topics you mentioned. However, it is always safe to check with your professor. My Civ Pro professor liked people citing cases even when covering the FRCP heavy topics. However, he was the exception and not the norm.

johansantana21 wrote:That helps. My school 1st semester civpro doesn't cover personal jurisdiction.

It's more like pretrial, amendments, trial, discovery, judgments etc. So is it normal that I'm not finding many if any cases that important?

What about Iqbal (sp?) and Hickman v. Taylor? These seem to be pretty seminal procedural cases.

DocHawkeye wrote:

johansantana21 wrote:That helps. My school 1st semester civpro doesn't cover personal jurisdiction.

It's more like pretrial, amendments, trial, discovery, judgments etc. So is it normal that I'm not finding many if any cases that important?

What about Iqbal (sp?) and Hickman v. Taylor? These seem to be pretty seminal procedural cases.

They are important cases, but not for the topics listed. Iqbal covers pleading standards and Hickman covers Res Judicata (and the concept of having your day in court in general). Other semi-"essential" cases I would argue are Blonder-Tongue, Erie, Mathews (or one of any subsequent due process test cases, such as Hamdi), Mullane, the jurisdiction line (now ending with McIntyre, but previously Asahi), and whatever cases you use to explore class actions and joinder of parties.

Note, some, but I doubt all, of these cases may be omitted in whatever CivPro class you're taking, however the concepts they cover should probably be in every class. I'm definitely missing some cases, and even some key topics, but the general sense of the above should demonstrate that cases are indeed important in CivPro (I loved the cases and did well in the class). Understanding how cases express/develop the concept or rules is the key.

Detrox wrote:

DocHawkeye wrote:

johansantana21 wrote:That helps. My school 1st semester civpro doesn't cover personal jurisdiction.

It's more like pretrial, amendments, trial, discovery, judgments etc. So is it normal that I'm not finding many if any cases that important?

What about Iqbal (sp?) and Hickman v. Taylor? These seem to be pretty seminal procedural cases.

They are important cases, but not for the topics listed. Iqbal covers pleading standards and Hickman covers Res Judicata (and the concept of having your day in court in general). Other semi-"essential" cases I would argue are Blonder-Tongue, Erie, Mathews (or one of any subsequent due process test cases, such as Hamdi), Mullane, the jurisdiction line (now ending with McIntyre, but previously Asahi), and whatever cases you use to explore class actions and joinder of parties.

Note, some, but I doubt all, of these cases may be omitted in whatever CivPro class you're taking, however the concepts they cover should probably be in every class. I'm definitely missing some cases, and even some key topics, but the general sense of the above should demonstrate that cases are indeed important in CivPro (I loved the cases and did well in the class). Understanding how cases express/develop the concept or rules is the key.

Maybe I'm remembering wrong, but isn't Hickman a discovery case - work product rule?

Either way, my aim was not so much to match cases to the specific points mentioned but to illustrate that there are significant cases that relate to Civil Procedure in general. Sorry if I wan't clear. Call it the mistake of a 1L who has spent too many hours outlining Crim Law and not enough hours watching football.

Yes we covered Twombly Iqbal and Hickman. A lot of emphasis on Twombly Iqbal but only a bit on Hickman.