Themis Bar Review Hangout - July 2017 Forum

[honeyybee]

CIV PRO QUESTION:

First,

If a party is

(1) incorporated in State A,
(2) has its headquarters in State B, and
(3) does substantial business activity in State C (assuming pjx & minimum contacts are met)

can it be considered a citizen of all three (A, B, and C)?

Second,

IF SO, will there still be diversity jurisdiction if the OTHER party is a citizen and domiciliary of State B (assuming amount in controversy is met)?

Basically, if a party can be a citizen of multiple states, can it choose (for the purposes of litigation) to be considered a citizen of a state different than the other party (in this case, State A or State C) in order to maintain diversity?

Sorry if this is confusing. Thanks everyone!

[champloo]

CIV PRO QUESTION:

First,

If a party is

(1) incorporated in State A,
(2) has its headquarters in State B, and
(3) does substantial business activity in State C (assuming pjx & minimum contacts are met)

can it be considered a citizen of all three (A, B, and C)?

Second,

IF SO, will there still be diversity jurisdiction if the OTHER party is a citizen and domiciliary of State B (assuming amount in controversy is met)?

Basically, if a party can be a citizen of multiple states, can it choose (for the purposes of litigation) to be considered a citizen of a state different than the other party (in this case, State A or State C) in order to maintain diversity?

Sorry if this is confusing. Thanks everyone!

lol i had this exact set of questions. this is confusing.

[SplitMyPants]

for the second question, the answer is definitely no, they can't choose. you look to all states that a corp is a citizen of when determining diversity.

for the first, (3) only matters for things like PJ and is often a red herring for purposes of diversity.
a corp is only a citizen of (1) its state of incorp and (2) the state where it has its nerve center.

someone correct me if im wrong

[Pilking76]

CIV PRO QUESTION:

First,

If a party is

(1) incorporated in State A,
(2) has its headquarters in State B, and
(3) does substantial business activity in State C (assuming pjx & minimum contacts are met)

can it be considered a citizen of all three (A, B, and C)?

Second,

IF SO, will there still be diversity jurisdiction if the OTHER party is a citizen and domiciliary of State B (assuming amount in controversy is met)?

Basically, if a party can be a citizen of multiple states, can it choose (for the purposes of litigation) to be considered a citizen of a state different than the other party (in this case, State A or State C) in order to maintain diversity?

Sorry if this is confusing. Thanks everyone!

An individual is a citizen of the state or country in which they are domiciled. An individual can only have one domicile at a time, and so an individual can only be a citizen of one state or country at a time for diversity purposes.

A corporation is a citizen in every state in which it is either: 1. incorporated, 2. has its principal place of business. A corporation can be incorporated in multiple states, however its principal place of business is only in one state. The principal place of business means the 'nerve center' which is where the major decisions are made, where the executive officers are located, generally a companies headquarters. Where a company does a substantial part of its business activity is not relevant for determining diversity, but will be pertinent for personal jurisdiction (e.g. a company headquartered and incorporated in State A, but its only manufacturing facility is in State B, it will be a citizen of only State A).

Again, because a corporation is a citizen of every state where it is either incorporated or has its principal place of business, it cannot elect amongst its various states of citizenship in order to maintain complete diversity. E.g. Citizen of State A sues a corporation incorporated in State B and C, and its principal place of business is in State A, complete diversity would look like: A v. A, B, C (because there is an A on both sides, there is no complete diversity).

[robin600]

Comments from essay grader - another really solid essay, keep up the great work. Score =39

[champloo]

CIV PRO QUESTION:

First,

If a party is

(1) incorporated in State A,
(2) has its headquarters in State B, and
(3) does substantial business activity in State C (assuming pjx & minimum contacts are met)

can it be considered a citizen of all three (A, B, and C)?

Second,

IF SO, will there still be diversity jurisdiction if the OTHER party is a citizen and domiciliary of State B (assuming amount in controversy is met)?

Basically, if a party can be a citizen of multiple states, can it choose (for the purposes of litigation) to be considered a citizen of a state different than the other party (in this case, State A or State C) in order to maintain diversity?

Sorry if this is confusing. Thanks everyone!

An individual is a citizen of the state or country in which they are domiciled. An individual can only have one domicile at a time, and so an individual can only be a citizen of one state or country at a time for diversity purposes.

A corporation is a citizen in every state in which it is either: 1. incorporated, 2. has its principal place of business. A corporation can be incorporated in multiple states, however its principal place of business is only in one state. The principal place of business means the 'nerve center' which is where the major decisions are made, where the executive officers are located, generally a companies headquarters. Where a company does a substantial part of its business activity is not relevant for determining diversity, but will be pertinent for personal jurisdiction (e.g. a company headquartered and incorporated in State A, but its only manufacturing facility is in State B, it will be a citizen of only State A).

Again, because a corporation is a citizen of every state where it is either incorporated or has its principal place of business, it cannot elect amongst its various states of citizenship in order to maintain complete diversity. E.g. Citizen of State A sues a corporation incorporated in State B and C, and its principal place of business is in State A, complete diversity would look like: A v. A, B, C (because there is an A on both sides, there is no complete diversity).

wow this was so helpful. thanks! one follow up tho:

(e.g. a company headquartered and incorporated in State A, but its only manufacturing facility is in State B, it will be a citizen of only State A)

state B would still have pj over the company even though the company is not a citizen of B, right? i swear i knew all this during 1L.

[honeyybee]

CIV PRO QUESTION:

First,

If a party is

(1) incorporated in State A,
(2) has its headquarters in State B, and
(3) does substantial business activity in State C (assuming pjx & minimum contacts are met)

can it be considered a citizen of all three (A, B, and C)?

Second,

IF SO, will there still be diversity jurisdiction if the OTHER party is a citizen and domiciliary of State B (assuming amount in controversy is met)?

Basically, if a party can be a citizen of multiple states, can it choose (for the purposes of litigation) to be considered a citizen of a state different than the other party (in this case, State A or State C) in order to maintain diversity?

Sorry if this is confusing. Thanks everyone!

An individual is a citizen of the state or country in which they are domiciled. An individual can only have one domicile at a time, and so an individual can only be a citizen of one state or country at a time for diversity purposes.

A corporation is a citizen in every state in which it is either: 1. incorporated, 2. has its principal place of business. A corporation can be incorporated in multiple states, however its principal place of business is only in one state. The principal place of business means the 'nerve center' which is where the major decisions are made, where the executive officers are located, generally a companies headquarters. Where a company does a substantial part of its business activity is not relevant for determining diversity, but will be pertinent for personal jurisdiction (e.g. a company headquartered and incorporated in State A, but its only manufacturing facility is in State B, it will be a citizen of only State A).

Again, because a corporation is a citizen of every state where it is either incorporated or has its principal place of business, it cannot elect amongst its various states of citizenship in order to maintain complete diversity. E.g. Citizen of State A sues a corporation incorporated in State B and C, and its principal place of business is in State A, complete diversity would look like: A v. A, B, C (because there is an A on both sides, there is no complete diversity).

Thank you! I had a similar question in one of the Civ Pro MBE PQ sets but the explanation was rather conclusory. Thanks again!

[Love With The Coco]

Comments from essay grader - another really solid essay, keep up the great work. Score =39

Where do you find the overall score for graded essays? All I can find are the 1-6 scales for different grading subjects. Do you just add those together?


Also, my very first graded essay had a score relative to others on Thesis. But that feature seems to have been removed. Anybody else notice this?

[Pilking76]

CIV PRO QUESTION:

First,

If a party is

(1) incorporated in State A,
(2) has its headquarters in State B, and
(3) does substantial business activity in State C (assuming pjx & minimum contacts are met)

can it be considered a citizen of all three (A, B, and C)?

Second,

IF SO, will there still be diversity jurisdiction if the OTHER party is a citizen and domiciliary of State B (assuming amount in controversy is met)?

Basically, if a party can be a citizen of multiple states, can it choose (for the purposes of litigation) to be considered a citizen of a state different than the other party (in this case, State A or State C) in order to maintain diversity?

Sorry if this is confusing. Thanks everyone!

An individual is a citizen of the state or country in which they are domiciled. An individual can only have one domicile at a time, and so an individual can only be a citizen of one state or country at a time for diversity purposes.

A corporation is a citizen in every state in which it is either: 1. incorporated, 2. has its principal place of business. A corporation can be incorporated in multiple states, however its principal place of business is only in one state. The principal place of business means the 'nerve center' which is where the major decisions are made, where the executive officers are located, generally a companies headquarters. Where a company does a substantial part of its business activity is not relevant for determining diversity, but will be pertinent for personal jurisdiction (e.g. a company headquartered and incorporated in State A, but its only manufacturing facility is in State B, it will be a citizen of only State A).

Again, because a corporation is a citizen of every state where it is either incorporated or has its principal place of business, it cannot elect amongst its various states of citizenship in order to maintain complete diversity. E.g. Citizen of State A sues a corporation incorporated in State B and C, and its principal place of business is in State A, complete diversity would look like: A v. A, B, C (because there is an A on both sides, there is no complete diversity).

wow this was so helpful. thanks! one follow up tho:

(e.g. a company headquartered and incorporated in State A, but its only manufacturing facility is in State B, it will be a citizen of only State A)

state B would still have pj over the company even though the company is not a citizen of B, right? i swear i knew all this during 1L.

A court has general jurisdiction over an individual who is domiciled in the state (in addition to those physically present and consent). Similarly, if a corporation is incorporated in a state, or has its principal place of business in a state ("nerve center") it is considered "at home" there and is subject to general jurisdiction. You will always have personal jurisdiction over a company in the states in which it is a citizen for diversity.

If the company merely conducts substantial business activity in the state (what I think you mean by saying the company is not a citizen of State B), the state will still have personal jurisdiction over the company so long as minimum contacts and fair play and substantial justice are satisfied (i.e. specific jurisdiction). The court would only have personal jurisdiction over the company as it concerns its contacts with the state.

If an employee is injured in the manufacturing facility, its entirely fair for the company to be sued in State B, as that is a suit arising from its contacts with the state. If the company enters a cleaning contract with someone to clean the headquarters in State A, they can't sue in State B because the suit does not arise from contacts with State B and they are not "at home" there.

[whats an updog]

wow this was so helpful. thanks! one follow up tho:

(e.g. a company headquartered and incorporated in State A, but its only manufacturing facility is in State B, it will be a citizen of only State A)

state B would still have pj over the company even though the company is not a citizen of B, right? i swear i knew all this during 1L.

State B will only have specific jurisdiction over the company. In other words, if the claim or case relates to the manufacturing facility in State B, then it will have personal jurisdiction as to that claim. It will likely not have general jurisdiction (meaning that the company can't be sued for ANY reason in State B), because the test for general jurisdiction over a company is that the company is "at home" in the state. The SCOTUS has found that "at home" essentially only means PPB/Inc., so the general jurisdiction test for a company is the same as citizenship for the purposes of DJ.

edit: got scooped, and with a more clear explanation to boot!

[Pilking76]

Comments from essay grader - another really solid essay, keep up the great work. Score =39

Where do you find the overall score for graded essays? All I can find are the 1-6 scales for different grading subjects. Do you just add those together?


Also, my very first graded essay had a score relative to others on Thesis. But that feature seems to have been removed. Anybody else notice this?

Green Course Progress tab > View Overall Progress > Graded Essays (View Details)

[champloo]

thanks for the clear explanations, guys. makes sense now.

[Love With The Coco]

Comments from essay grader - another really solid essay, keep up the great work. Score =39

Where do you find the overall score for graded essays? All I can find are the 1-6 scales for different grading subjects. Do you just add those together?


Also, my very first graded essay had a score relative to others on Thesis. But that feature seems to have been removed. Anybody else notice this?

Green Course Progress tab > View Overall Progress > Graded Essays (View Details)

Thanks.

Seems some graders just plug in the same score every time....

[Puffman1234]

Any Texas takers here who've filled out the Secured Transaction and Commercial Paper lecture handouts who would be willing to send them to me? I would be extremely grateful.

Thanks!

[cunninghat]

This may have come up in the the thread, but is there a consensus "magic number" of MBE practice questions? I've been focusing on and scheduling around the MBE portion, and haven't really done much in the way of essays or MPT practice (e.g. written like 5 full MEE essays, looked at sample answers for a few more, and outlined a single MPT). I'm getting a little nervous that I might be too unbalanced in my approach, but since MBE is such a large chunk of the NY exam, I wanted to hammer it home before switching focus to MEE/MPTs with 2 weeks left or so.

Is this a bad idea? At what point is there a diminishing return to drilling MBE Qs? How many MEE/MPTs are you guys all planning on having writte/reviewed/outlined at the end?

[gatorfan163287]

This may have come up in the the thread, but is there a consensus "magic number" of MBE practice questions? I've been focusing on and scheduling around the MBE portion, and haven't really done much in the way of essays or MPT practice (e.g. written like 5 full MEE essays, looked at sample answers for a few more, and outlined a single MPT). I'm getting a little nervous that I might be too unbalanced in my approach, but since MBE is such a large chunk of the NY exam, I wanted to hammer it home before switching focus to MEE/MPTs with 2 weeks left or so.

Is this a bad idea? At what point is there a diminishing return to drilling MBE Qs? How many MEE/MPTs are you guys all planning on having writte/reviewed/outlined at the end?

I've heard 1500 MBE questions is a good number (I'm currently at 1155 done following the NY schedule to the T). As for essays and MPTs, who knows. Those are more to practice whittling down the time it takes for you to read it, analyze it, and write an answer. Most essays I've just been issue spotting so far and trying to just identify the law and how I'd answer it before reading the sample answer. Have done 3 MPTs entirely becauseI'm trying to whittle down my timing to under the 90 minutes and doing them fully has helped.

I'm just scared right now because while I'm doing well on the PQ's (70%+) and on the practice exams (85 and 91%), I feel like I don't know shit when it comes to the essays. Hopeful that the next 3.5 weeks is enough to keep doing questions and drill home the black letter law enough to write an essay on the subjects.

[star fox]

This may have come up in the the thread, but is there a consensus "magic number" of MBE practice questions? I've been focusing on and scheduling around the MBE portion, and haven't really done much in the way of essays or MPT practice (e.g. written like 5 full MEE essays, looked at sample answers for a few more, and outlined a single MPT). I'm getting a little nervous that I might be too unbalanced in my approach, but since MBE is such a large chunk of the NY exam, I wanted to hammer it home before switching focus to MEE/MPTs with 2 weeks left or so.

Is this a bad idea? At what point is there a diminishing return to drilling MBE Qs? How many MEE/MPTs are you guys all planning on having writte/reviewed/outlined at the end?

I've heard 1500 MBE questions is a good number (I'm currently at 1155 done following the NY schedule to the T). As for essays and MPTs, who knows. Those are more to practice whittling down the time it takes for you to read it, analyze it, and write an answer. Most essays I've just been issue spotting so far and trying to just identify the law and how I'd answer it before reading the sample answer. Have done 3 MPTs entirely becauseI'm trying to whittle down my timing to under the 90 minutes and doing them fully has helped.

I'm just scared right now because while I'm doing well on the PQ's (70%+) and on the practice exams (85 and 91%), I feel like I don't know shit when it comes to the essays. Hopeful that the next 3.5 weeks is enough to keep doing questions and drill home the black letter law enough to write an essay on the subjects.

I think you'll be alright

[cunninghat]

This may have come up in the the thread, but is there a consensus "magic number" of MBE practice questions? I've been focusing on and scheduling around the MBE portion, and haven't really done much in the way of essays or MPT practice (e.g. written like 5 full MEE essays, looked at sample answers for a few more, and outlined a single MPT). I'm getting a little nervous that I might be too unbalanced in my approach, but since MBE is such a large chunk of the NY exam, I wanted to hammer it home before switching focus to MEE/MPTs with 2 weeks left or so.

Is this a bad idea? At what point is there a diminishing return to drilling MBE Qs? How many MEE/MPTs are you guys all planning on having writte/reviewed/outlined at the end?

I've heard 1500 MBE questions is a good number (I'm currently at 1155 done following the NY schedule to the T). As for essays and MPTs, who knows. Those are more to practice whittling down the time it takes for you to read it, analyze it, and write an answer. Most essays I've just been issue spotting so far and trying to just identify the law and how I'd answer it before reading the sample answer. Have done 3 MPTs entirely becauseI'm trying to whittle down my timing to under the 90 minutes and doing them fully has helped.

I'm just scared right now because while I'm doing well on the PQ's (70%+) and on the practice exams (85 and 91%), I feel like I don't know shit when it comes to the essays. Hopeful that the next 3.5 weeks is enough to keep doing questions and drill home the black letter law enough to write an essay on the subjects.

Damn, those are some great %s. I've been doing okay on the PQs (~65% overall, but ranging from mid 50s to high 70s for subject specific), only to get crushed by the practice exams...

[champloo]

Con law is kicking my ass. Any general tips?

[Love With The Coco]

This may have come up in the the thread, but is there a consensus "magic number" of MBE practice questions? I've been focusing on and scheduling around the MBE portion, and haven't really done much in the way of essays or MPT practice (e.g. written like 5 full MEE essays, looked at sample answers for a few more, and outlined a single MPT). I'm getting a little nervous that I might be too unbalanced in my approach, but since MBE is such a large chunk of the NY exam, I wanted to hammer it home before switching focus to MEE/MPTs with 2 weeks left or so.

Is this a bad idea? At what point is there a diminishing return to drilling MBE Qs? How many MEE/MPTs are you guys all planning on having writte/reviewed/outlined at the end?

I've heard 1500 MBE questions is a good number (I'm currently at 1155 done following the NY schedule to the T). As for essays and MPTs, who knows. Those are more to practice whittling down the time it takes for you to read it, analyze it, and write an answer. Most essays I've just been issue spotting so far and trying to just identify the law and how I'd answer it before reading the sample answer. Have done 3 MPTs entirely becauseI'm trying to whittle down my timing to under the 90 minutes and doing them fully has helped.

I'm just scared right now because while I'm doing well on the PQ's (70%+) and on the practice exams (85 and 91%), I feel like I don't know shit when it comes to the essays. Hopeful that the next 3.5 weeks is enough to keep doing questions and drill home the black letter law enough to write an essay on the subjects.

Dude you scored an 85% and 91%. You're gonna fail

[lavarman84]

Comments from essay grader - another really solid essay, keep up the great work. Score =39

Where do you find the overall score for graded essays? All I can find are the 1-6 scales for different grading subjects. Do you just add those together?


Also, my very first graded essay had a score relative to others on Thesis. But that feature seems to have been removed. Anybody else notice this?

Green Course Progress tab > View Overall Progress > Graded Essays (View Details)

Thanks.

Seems some graders just plug in the same score every time....

Glad I'm not the only one who feels this way. On my last graded essay, I hit every issue but one small sub-issue. I correctly stated the law. I analyzed both sides of each issue pretty decently (discussed everything that was in the sample answer but came to contrary conclusions on a couple of issues). I organized it in a clear manner. I used IRAC. I still got a 43/100. My essay answer looks quite similar to the sample answer provided.

I just don't know what I need to do to get a decent score.

[bmmccb223]

Was the 5th Civ Pro MBE problem set way too nuanced, or is it just me?

[rdelaney]

Was the 5th Civ Pro MBE problem set way too nuanced, or is it just me?

I hope it isn't just you because I also felt the same way. These MBE PQs are getting on my last nerve. I understand increasing difficulty on these questions, but getting into this level of detail seems like a waste of time.

[SplitMyPants]

Was the 5th Civ Pro MBE problem set way too nuanced, or is it just me?

I hope it isn't just you because I also felt the same way. These MBE PQs are getting on my last nerve. I understand increasing difficulty on these questions, but getting into this level of detail seems like a waste of time.

ya i just got my ass handed to me on that

[bmmccb223]

Was the 5th Civ Pro MBE problem set way too nuanced, or is it just me?

I hope it isn't just you because I also felt the same way. These MBE PQs are getting on my last nerve. I understand increasing difficulty on these questions, but getting into this level of detail seems like a waste of time.

Yeah it's kind of ridiculous. There's no way in hell I'll be able to memorize the level of detail they include in the practice questions for every subject.