Civil Procedure II

Civil Procedure II

INSTRUCTIONS

— Please answer in no more than seven pages total.

— Read each question through completely before you begin answering that question.  Make sure you are answering the question I have asked.

— There are six questions on the exam worth a total of 80 points.  Each of the questions, and their subparts, if any, have specific point values assigned.  The fewer the points, the less time you should spend on the question or subpart of the question.

— Read each question carefully and remember that your exam answers will be assessed not just for their legal conclusions but also for organization, persuasiveness, and clarity. If appropriate to do so you should cite the FRCP supporting your answer.

— If your answer requires you to assume fact or law, state that assumption clearly and say why it makes a difference in your analysis.

— If you use an acronym, be sure it is readily identifiable – notwithstanding the suggested time frame, I expect you to write in prose.

— Always assume that the law is as I describe it.  Do not make contrary assumptions based on what you may have learned in your other courses.  And do not assume that the law I give you on this exam is useful for any purpose beyond this exam.

Question 1: (5 points)

Ripoff Corporation has engaged in price-fixing, causing persons who purchased their stereo equipment to have paid $50 more per item than required. Mark Music sues Ripoff in an appropriate U.S. District Court for a federal antitrust violation as representative of the class of persons who have bought Ripoff stereo equipment within the applicable statute of limitations. The class is certified under FRCP 23(b) (3). The following notice is prepared for mailing to all class members (approximately 125,000 persons): “You are hereby notified that a class action has been brought in U.S. District Court under Rule 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by Mr Mark Music on behalf of all persons who have purchased Ripoff stereo equipment. You may opt-out of the class within one month of this notice. If you choose to remain in the action, you may appear through an attorney.” 

Is the notice sent to the class adequate?  Why or why not?

Answer: This notice is not adequate. It is shallow and lacks detail. The federal civil procedure rules (specifically, FRCP 23) require the court to direct notice “in a reasonable manner” Before sending the legal notice to the class members the representative is first supposed to send emails or other forms of communications to the class members; known as Legal notice of class Action the document notifies the class members of their inclusion in the class, clear details of the nature of the allegations the class purposes to file against the common defendant as well as for instructions on how members can “opt-out” of the class and file independent lawsuits if they wish to.

Question 2: (5 points)

P is a franchiser of fast-food restaurants. D holds a franchise issued by P for a particular restaurant location. P is incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of business in New York. D is incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of business in Florida. P wishes to terminate D’s franchise.  Therefore, P has filed an action in Florida federal district court for a declaratory judgment that by the terms of the franchise contract, P is entitled to terminate D’s franchise.  P’s complaint raises no substantive issues other than issues of state contract law. D has submitted an answer asserting that P wishes to terminate D’s franchise so that P can operate D’s store itself; D asserts that this cancellation would be a violation of federal antitrust laws. Both P and D wish the action to proceed in federal court to avoid the congestion of the Florida state courts. The federal judge is convinced that D’s antitrust defence is not frivolous.  Any applicable amount in controversy requirement is satisfied.

Does the federal court for Florida have subject matter jurisdiction over this case? 

Why or why not? Please support your answer.

Answer: Florida does not have jurisdiction over the subject matter. This is because franchise P is the primary subject under consideration and it happens to be incorporated in Delaware. Thus, any disputes arising between the franchise and its subsidiaries (irrespective of the state where they are located) can only be resolved by Delaware laws of business incorporation. The topic locale is the force designated to a court by constitution or statute,5 an installation of the lawful scene that procedural occasions in a particular case are probably not going to change. Individual purview relies upon an individual’s contacts with the gathering state, regularly not on the pleadings.6 The idea of “ward” that is subject to pleadings or other procedural occasions, thusly, must establish an unmistakable third type of locale, which could be called a procedural locale, or all the more vividly, “greenlight locale.” Despite its significance as a standard of procedural law, its genuine importance and lawful centrality still can’t seem to be stood up to convincingly. Understanding the various kinds of locale is pivotal to the expert on the grounds that every ha “its own legitimate significance”

Question 3 (10 points)

P was injured when he attempted to rescue X from a burning car. X and Y had collided at an intersection. P sued Y in the appropriate U.S. District Court but not X.  Y claims that X’s conduct was the exclusive cause of the accident that resulted in injury to P and seeks to join X in the action.  Under applicable state law, if X is not named as a defendant and X and Y were joint and several tortfeasors, Y would have no right of contribution from X if a judgment were obtained against Y in the P v Y action. P is a citizen of Minnesota, Y is a citizen of Vermont and X is a citizen of Minnesota.

How should the Court rule on Y’s motion to join X in the action? Following your selection of the best answer below, explain the answer.

1. The Court should grant the motion, because Y’s contention that X was responsible for the accident may (at trial) prove to be correct.
2. The Court should grant the motion because there is a common nucleus of operative facts.
3. The court should deny the motion because X is not an indispensable party.
4. The Court should deny the motion because joinder of X would destroy subject matter jurisdiction.

Answer: B.   The Court should grant the motion because there is a common nucleus of operative facts. Both P  and Y cannot present their arguments without featuring X; first and foremost the major reason for Ps involvement and the subsequent injuries that he suffered was as a result of the accident that had occurred between Y and X’s car. Further, if X had not been on the road then the accident could not have occurred as Y could not have collided with them. X is, therefore, a common nucleus of the operative facts leading to the occurrence of the accident and the tort.

Question 4 (20 points)

Priscilla, a citizen of Wyoming, files a civil action for $100,000 in federal court in Michigan against Donald’s Hair Salon, Inc., alleging the salon negligently caused her hair to become discoloured.  Donald’s is a Delaware Corporation with its headquarters in Michigan.  The defendant moves to dismiss the action for failure to join parties required to be joined by Rule 19.  In particular, Donald’s argues that Petra, a citizen of Michigan, must be joined because she has a similar claim against it for hair discolouration and that Tonics Inc., a Hawaii Corporation with its headquarters and all of its activities in Hawaii, also must be joined because it created the hair lotion that may have contributed to the plaintiff’s losses.

How should the court rule? What other facts might be necessary to answer this question? What factors should the court consider in answering this Rule 19 question and using those factors, how should they analyze this? (18 pts)

If the federal court judge denies Donald’s motion, could Donald’s file an interlocutory appeal and if so what requirements must it satisfy to succeed in this interlocutory appeal? (2 pts)

Answer:  Some of the key facts that the court should consider include:

1. Is Petra interested in been joined in this case or so she prefers to pursue her compliant independently?
2. Has Donald’s salon filed any other claim against Tonics’s Inc over the same grounds of hair lotion formula?
3. Was the lotion the major cause of Priscilla’s hair discolouration?

Factors to consider in rule 19 determination

The factors to be considered by the court include:

1. first, to what extent a judgment rendered in the person’s absence might be prejudicial to the person or those already parties; for instance, how does the absence of Tonics’s Inc and Pretra affect the judicial process and hence justice to Donalds Salon and Pricilla as the primary parties in this complaint?
2. Second, the extent to which, by protective provisions in the judgment, by the shaping of relief, or other measures, the prejudice can be lessened or avoided;
3. Third, whether a judgment rendered in the two parties absence will be adequate;
4. Fourth, whether the plaintiff will have an adequate remedy if the action is dismissed for nonjoinder.

Question 5 (30 points)

Priscilla, a citizen of Wyoming, originally filed an action for $100,000 in federal court in Michigan against Donald’s Hair Salon, Inc., alleging that the salon negligently caused the discolouration of her hair.  Donald’s Hair Salon, Inc., is a Delaware Corporation with its headquarters in Michigan.  Priscilla’s attorney discovers that at least 200 people have suffered various degrees of hair discolouration in the past two years at Donald’s Hair Salon.  Priscilla files a timely, amended complaint to assert a class action on behalf of herself and all other victims seeking damages from $50,000 to $4 million for their hair discolourations caused by Donald’s Hair Salon, Inc. in the past two years.

1. May the action be filed in federal court if several of the plaintiffs are domiciled in Michigan? Cite the authority for your answer. (1pt)

Answer: No the class action cannot be filed in federal court.  In 2005, the US Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d) (CAFA). CAFA expands federal jurisdiction over class actions, to reduce inconsistency among class actions litigated in the individual states, the claims should exceed five million USD.

1. May the action be filed in federal court if some of the plaintiffs do not have claims exceeding $75,000? Cite the authority for your answer. (1pt)

Answer: Yes, it can be filed in a federal court irrespective of the amounts of the individual claims but the collective amount should exceed $5Million.

1. Should the court certify the class? Why or why not. What additional facts are you assuming if any? (10pts)

Answer: Government Rule of Civil Procedure, Rule 23(a) gives that activity requires four conditions to meet all requirements for class treatment: (I) the class must be various to the point that joinder of all individuals is impracticable, (ii) there must be questions of law or truth normal to the class, (iii) the cases of the delegate parties must be ordinary of the cases of the class, and (iv) the agent gatherings will reasonably and enough secure the interests of the class.

1. To what extent if at all should the court consider the underlying merits of the plaintiff’s claims in deciding whether to certify the class? Explain. (5pts)

Answer: Initially, a few courts have held that numerosity is typically settled when there are in any event 40 class individuals. Others have inferred that no fixed number of class individuals is adequate and that the court must consider different factors, for example, land scattering or the idea of the activity.

Second, after the U.S. Incomparable Court’s choice in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011), just presenting a rundown of regular inquiries isn’t sufficient to show shared characteristic. Rather, a court choosing the shared characteristic of accurate issues should thoroughly break down the offended parties’ conflict that these issues can be demonstrated on a class-wide premise: What matters  is the limit of a class-wide continuing to create regular answers able to drive the goals of the suit.”

Third, to decide regularity the courts consider to what degree offended parties’ cases are extraordinarily unique or are commonly the equivalent (for example emerging from a similar occasion or example) as those of different class individuals as for the applicable lawful hypothesis and authentic conditions of the case.

In conclusion, the ampleness prerequisite decides if the interests and motivations among the offended parties and the remainder of the class are adjusted, or if, paradoxically, the class activity isn’t in light of a legitimate concern for all class individuals. Courts additionally investigate the ampleness of advice.

1. May the court certify the class without considering whether the plaintiff has introduced sufficient admissible evidence to show that damages can be awarded on a class-wide basis? (5pts)

Answer: No. the court must establish that the plaintiff has introduced sufficient admissible evidence to show that damages can be awarded on a class-wide basis. Further, all the class members must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the extend and summation of damages suffered.

1. If the court decides as a matter of law that there is not a sufficient basis to certify the class, what is the standard of appellate review for that decision? Explain your answer. (3pts)

Answer: Class certification orders are reviewed for abuse of discretion. Standards of review reflect the law’s perspective on an appellate court’s ability to make the right decision on a given issue.

If the parties presented a settlement of this action that gives the plaintiffs a total of $500,000 and award attorney’s fees to the plaintiff’s lawyers in the amount of $500,000, what factors should the court consider in determining whether to approve the settlement? (5pts)

Answer: The court must determine whether the settlement is “fair, reasonable, and adequate” to the class members. In doing so, the court will consider any objections filed by absent class members. If the court determines the settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate, the court should grant final approval of the settlement

Question 6: (10 points)

Country Life Insurance Corporation issues a $100,000 life insurance policy on the life of Marlene. When Marlene dies, her daughters Cheryl and Debbie each claim to be the sole beneficiary of the $100,000 life insurance proceeds. Country Life Insurance Corporation is a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of business in Idaho. Cheryl is domiciled in Idaho and Debbie is domiciled in Montana.

1. May Country Life Insurance Corporation file an interpleader action naming Cheryl and Debbie as parties? (1pt)

Answer: Yes.

1. In what courts could they file their action? Should it be statutory or rule interpleader? Explain why. Is one better than the other? Why? (9)

Answer:

They can only file their actions in Delaware circuit court as the Country Life insurance is incorporated under the Delaware laws.

The action would be rule interpleader.

Both Cheryl and Debbie have equal chances in this matter as they are both biological children of the deceased.