Professor Perritt

hperritt@kentlaw.edu

(312) 906-5128

Office: Room 713

Monday 0935-1110 Wednesday 0935-1110

Thursday 1015-1150

Spring 2004

Room C20

                                                                                             

                                                                                             

CIVIL PROCEDURE

COURSE INFORMATION

COURSE CONTENT

Civil Procedure is a five-credit one semester course in the law of civil procedure.

REQUIRED COURSE MATERIALS

·        Marcus, Redish & Sherman, Civil Procedure: A Modern Approach (3d ed. 2000)

·        Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (2003-2004 Educational Edition) to be read in conjunction with the Marcus, Redish & Sherman text.

·        Supplementary materials available on the Website. www.kentlaw.edu/perritt/courses/civpro.

SYLLABUS

Date

Unit

Subject

Assignment (pages in Marcus, Redish & Sherman)

 

 

CHAPTER IX. CHOOSING THE FORUM - GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION

666-836

21 Jan

1

A. The Traditional Formulation: The ‘Power” Theory of Jurisdiction,

 667-686

22 Jan

2

Same

Harris v. Balk diagram (MS Power Point)

Harris v. Balk diagram (jpeg)

26 Jan

3

B. The Shift to Minimum Contacts,

 686-697; Note on limited v. special appearances

28 Jan

4

C. The States’ Response - Long Arm Statutes,

 697-706

29 Jan

5

D. Refining the Minimum Contacts Analysis,

 706-759

2 Feb

6

Same

hypos from Yahoo, and Australia Dow Jones; Note on stream-of-commerce-theory

4 Feb

7

E. Presence of Defendant’s Property,

 760-778; Venn diagram illustrating analytical factors for PJ

5 Feb

8

F. Personal Service Within the Jurisdiction,

 778-796

9 Feb

9

G. The General Jurisdiction Alternative,

 796-804

Carson Block flowchart

Scott Horwitz flowchart

Alysia Stiles flowchart

Guy Prihar flowchart

11 Feb

10

H. Consent,

 804-809

12 Feb

11

I. Jurisdictional “Ouster” by Consent - Forum Selection Clauses,

 809-815

Chris Luttkus flowchart (being revised)

Jasmine Patel flowchart

Steve Pollack flowchart; small version

16 Feb

12

J. The Requirement of Notice,

 815-824

18 Feb

13

K. Venue,

 825-832; 28 U.S.C. §1391, 1404

Illinois venue statute

Illinois long-arm statute

Illinois corporation residence statute

Illinois local action venue statute

19 Feb

14

L. Discretionary Decline of Jurisdiction,

 833-845

NY venue rule - general

NY venue rule - public authorities

 

 

CHAPTER X CHOOSING THE FORUM - STATE v. FEDERAL COURT,

 846-920

23 Feb

15

A. Diversity of Citizenship,

 846-857; 28 U.S.C. § 1332

Note on complete diversity in class actions

25 Feb

16

Professionalism Day

 

26 Feb

17

B. Federal Question,

857-878; 28 U.S.C. § 1331

Hohfeldian analysis

1 Mar

18

C. The Penumbra of Federal Jurisdiction: Supplemental Jurisdiction,

 878-904; 28 U.S.C. § 1367

3 Mar

19

(I confirm we will do more supplemental jurisdiction on 3 Mar, and removal on 4 Mar. HHP)

 

4 Mar

20

D. Removal,

 905-920; 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1446-1447

HHP removal note

8 Mar

21

CHAPTER XI. CHOOSING THE LAW TO BE APPLIED IN FEDERAL COURT, (The Erie Doctrine)

Swift v. Tyson, p921;

Erie RR v. Tomkins, p922 & following notes

apply Erie to recent complex hypotheticals

10 Mar

22

MID-TERM REVIEW

Lecture (review notes and assignments preceding this class)

11 Mar

23

Attend a hearing or part of a trial in federal court

 

 

 

CHAPTER III. DESCRIBING AND DEFINING THE DISPUTE,

 118-219

22 Mar

24

A. The Historical Evolution of Pleading,

 118-128, Fed.R.Civ.P. 2-11; (optional: Harry Emmanuel Scozzaro, Jr., Notice Pleading Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Following Sweirkiewicz v. Sorema, 26 Am. J. Trial Advoc. 385 (2002) (good summary of common law pleading and comparison with Fed.R.Civ.P.))

24 Mar

25

B. Describing and Testing the Plaintiffs Claim,

 128-152; Fed.R.Civ.P. 8, 9, 16

Summons in Civil Action form

Kindred v. Panter complaint

Pup v. Butzer Collections complaint

25 Mar

26

(same)

152-182; Fed.R.Civ.P. 8, 9, 16

Block v. Claria Corp. cplt

Computer Fraud & Abuse Act

29 Mar

27

Practical drafting exercise

Watch client interview (Web video)

(send each of the following documents to civprodocs@kentlaw.edu)

Draft complaint (due today)

Draft Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a) disclosures (due 12 April)

Draft Initial Plaintiff Interrogatories to Defendant under Fed.R.Civ.P. 33 (due 14 April)

Sample complaints from the real world: ACLU, FCC, FOIA, NARM, SEC

31 Mar

28

C. Defendant’s Response,

 182-204; Fed.R.Civ.P. 12

Hypo

Sample answers: McConnell, CIA, Vitf

Motions to dismiss: e.g.1, e.g.2, e.g.3

1 Apr

29

(continued) +

D. Voluntary Dismissal,

 (continued from 31 Mar) +

204-206

5 Apr

30

E. Amendments to Pleading,

 207-219; Fed.R.Civ.P. 15

 

 

V. OBTAINING INFORMATION FOR TRIAL,

 320-402

7 Apr

31

A. The Promise and Reality of Broad Discovery,

 320-330; Fed.R.Civ.P. 26

Examples: Rule 26(a) disclosures, (alternative format), interrogatories, answers to interrogatories, request for production, request for admissions, notice of individual deposition, notice of multiple depositions, deposition transcript

8 Apr

33

B. The Discovery Devices,

 330-346; Fed.R.Civ.P. 27-37

Subpoena form

Be prepared to participate in a mock deposition of (a) Benaza, assuming the deposition was noticed by Officer Smith's lawyer, and (b) a mock deposition of the employer of the hypothetical motorcycle-accident victim, noticed by the plaintiff. Be prepared to conduct direct and cross examination, and to know the authority in the deposition rules for what you propose to do in the deposition and for what your opponent may try to do and you oppose.

12 Apr

33

Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures

Review Rule 26(a)(1) drafts

Consider discovery strategies in hypothetical motorcycle-accident victim case

14 Apr

34

Interrogatories, requests for production, requests for physical or mental examination and requests for production

Review interrogatory drafts (you do not need to write definitions; just write the questions)

Consider discovery strategies in hypothetical motorcycle-accident victim case

15 Apr

35

C. Managing the Scope and Burden of Discovery,

 346-360; Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(2)

Example of discovery plan

Judge Kimba Wood's model discovery plan

19 Apr

36

D. Exemptions From Discovery,

 360-391

21 Apr

37

E. Enforcing the Discovery Rules-Sanctions

 394-402; Fed.R.Civ.P. 37

22 Apr

38

F. Investigation-Fact Gathering Without Judicial Assistance; recap of major discovery events

 391-394; review pp xi-xviii in Rules Pamphlet; (optional) do your own timeline of events in a civil case between filing of the complaint and a motion for summary judgment; send it, if you wish, to civprodocs@kentlaw.edu

District of Maine ADA case docket sheet

District of Iowa ADA case docket sheet-jury

Eastern Districtof VA ADA case docket sheet

 

 

CHAPTER VI. ADJUDICATION BEFORE TRIAL: SUMMARY JUDGMENT,

 403-443

26 Apr

39

A. The Nature of the Summary Judgment Device: The Concept of Burden Shifting,

 404-427; Fed.R.Civ.P. 56

28 Apr

40

B. Meeting the Burden of Production: Determining the Appropriate Standard,

 427-443

Example of summary judgment in ADA case, affirming and reversing on two different counts

29 Apr

41

THE TRIAL

Photos of trial

497-506; Fed.R.Civ.P. 16, 49-52

Pre-trial order, Bennaza v. Smith

Proposed jury instructions, Bennaza v. Smith

N.D. Ill. Local Rule - Standing Order on pretrial procedures

Sample pretrial orders: No. 1; No. 2

3 May

43

ENFORCING JUDGMENTS; APPEALS

80-85; 93-96; Fed.R.Civ.P. 69; 1032-1036; 1045-1055; 1062-1064; 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1292

Form for writ of execution

Anonymous course evaluation forms will be distributed 10 minutes before normal end of class

4 May

44

REVIEW

Lecture (review all notes and assignments)

RECOMMENDED SECONDARY MATERIALS

James, Hazard, Leubsdorf, Civil Procedure (4th ed. 1992).

Shreve & Raven-Hansen, Understanding Civil Procedure (3rd ed. 2001).

Wright, Federal Courts (5th ed. 1994).

Wright, Miller & Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure (1969), kept up-to-date by cumulative pocket supplements (2001).

 

FINAL EXAMINATION

The final examination in this course will be given on Tuesday, 11 May 2004, at 8:30 AM and at no other time. It will last three hours.

In the final examination, you are responsible for all the materials discussed in class and in the assigned readings. Obviously, the examination cannot touch upon all that material, but anything we do in class, anything you see in your court visit, and anything in the assigned readings may be tested. You may bring any materials, whether commercially prepared or not, to the final exam, but successful performance on the exam will not require original research. Prepare for the exam as though it were “closed-book.”

ATTENDANCE

Much of the material and most of the legal analysis in this course is not contained in the assigned readings. Consequently, class attendance is an indispensable part of the course. Failure to attend regularly will result in exclusion from the course and a grade of “E” Sporadic absences will result in a lowering of your grade, in the discretion of the instructor. The instructor reserves the discretion to determine what constitutes “regularly” and “sporadic.” The only safe course is to attend every class.

TARDINESS

I strongly discourage tardiness and reserve the power to lower your grade for tardiness.

TEACHING ASSISTANT

Adrian Rohrer, 3L, is the Teaching Assistant for the course. His email address is arohrer@kentlaw.edu. He will be available every Tuesday from 11:30 AM to 12:30 PM for questions and will give supplementary presentations on certain material.

HATS

Do not wear hats in class.

WANDERING IN AND OUT OF CLASS

Once you are present in the classroom, please stay there, unless you have a genuine emergency. If an emergency requires you to leave the classroom, do not return.

CLASS PARTICIPATION

I teach “Socratically.” Every student is expected to be prepared in every class. Any student may be called on at any time. Volunteering is encouraged. There is no “right” answer; only cogent and persuasive arguments, backed up by legitimate legal authority.

ATTENDING A FEDERAL HEARING OR TRIAL

Attending a federal hearing or trial in United States District Court is a mandatory requirement for credit in the course. You may do this at any time during the semester, although the assignment is listed for a specific date. After attending, you must send me an email, briefly describing what you observed and explaining how it relates to one or more specific subjects in the syllabus.

FINAL GRADE

Your final grade will be determined by how well you do on the final exam, except that I reserve the power to decrease your final grade by one-half of a grade (e.g. A to A- or B- to C+) for unsatisfactory classroom participation, excessive tardiness, or more than five (5) absences. I also reserve the power to increase your final grade by one-half of a grade for outstanding classroom participation.

OFFICE HOURS & APPOINTMENTS

I welcome interaction with students. I will be happy to make an appointment to see any of you individually or in groups. I do not have specific office hours. If you want to meet, please set up an appointment by emailing me at hperritt@kentlaw.edu, calling me at (312) 906-5098, calling my assistant, Ms Patricia O’Neal at (312) 906-5128, by seeing me before or after class.

WEBSITE

http://www.kentlaw.edu/perritt/courses/civpro

The Website contains the syllabus, supplementary materials, old exams and model answers. Please check the Website regularly, particularly before you begin preparing for a particular class and again before coming to class. I will update it regularly. Note that course coverage probably was materially different in years for which exams and model exams are published.

E-MAIL

I may communicate with you by e-mail at any time throughout the semester. Check your e-mail regularly. If you would like to communicate with me via e-mail, please feel free to do so.