COURSE CONTENT

Civil Procedure is a five-credit one semester course in the law of dispute resolution in federal and state courts.

REQUIRED COURSE MATERIALS

· Marcus, Redish & Sherman, Civil Procedure: A Modern Approach (4th ed. 2005)

· Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (latest 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	Subject	Assignment (pages in Marcus, Redish & Sherman)
29 Aug	Constitutional entitlement to civil procedure; Enforcing judgments Swider "writ of attachment"	27-42 82-86; 95-96 Fed.R.Civ.P. 69 Form for writ of execution Recognition and enforcement statutes: Uniform Recognition of Foreign Money Judgments Act Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judments Act 28 U.S.C. sec. 1963
	CHAPTER IX. CHOOSING THE FORUM - GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION
31 Aug	The Traditional Formulation: The ‘Power” Theory of Jurisdiction,	690-710 Harris v. Balk diagram (MS Power Point) Harris v. Balk diagram (jpeg) Note on "paying twice" in Harris v. Balk Optional: Blackstone on service of original process IL post-judgment garnishment statutes IL pre-judgment attachment statutes
5 Sep	The Shift to Minimum Contacts, and the States’ Response - Long Arm Statutes Wood Industries v. KTA (basic facts)	710-723; 723-729 NY long arm statute (for hypothetical); KTA diagram (for hypothetical) Optional Note on limited v. special appearances Answer to question on process servers in Illinois
7 Sep	Refining the Minimum Contacts Analysis	729-749n.3; 752-764 n.2; 765-772 n.1; 776-786; Note on stream-of-commerce-theory (Optional after class: Yahoo (district court), Yahoo appeal, and Australia Dow Jones) Venn diagram illustrating analytical factors for PJ;
12 Sep	Presence of Defendant’s Property	791-809; In-rem jurisdiction provisions of Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act Optional after class: FMC Corp. v. Continental Illinois Nat'l Bank, No. 87 C 9640, 1988 WL 116825 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 21, 1988) Optiona: Venn diagram (.html) (Word)
14 Sep	Personal Service Within the Jurisdiction	809-821 Kentucky service of process rule (for use in class) Judge Friendly's list of elements of procedural due process (optional)
19 Sep	The General Jurisdiction Alternative [Professor Perritt may be a few minutes late for class]	821-833 G.D. Searle Lakin Gator.com (panel decision, pending rehearing en banc) Optional: graph Darrin Halcomb improved graph
21 Sep	Consent, Jurisdictional “Ouster” by Consent - Forum Selection Clauses	833-835 optional: generalization of Carnival Cruise Lines to diversity cases--Jones v. Weibrecht optional (for use in class): Actual forum selection clauses (.html) (Word) Hypothetical trial-by-combat forum selection clause (.html) (Word) Ears cut off (.html) (Word) optional, for, or after this class: Construct a flowchart/decision tree of personal jurisdiction; email it to civprodocs@kentlaw.edu; be willing to have it displayed and discussed in class
26 Sep	The Requirement of Notice	835-840; Fed.R.Civ.P. 4
28 Sep	Venue and Discretionary Decline of Jurisdiction	840-847; 847-859; 28 U.S.C. §1391, 1404 Hypo: Be prepared to argue either side of Part II of the amicus brief prepared for Wood Industries v. KTA (pertaining to forum non conveniens). If you need more facts, determine exactly what facts and how you would get them. Optional: Venn diagram The following illustrate state venue statutes. Illinois venue statute Illinois long-arm statute Illinois corporation residence statute Illinois local action venue statute NY venue rule - general NY venue rule - public authorities
	CHAPTER X CHOOSING THE FORUM - STATE v. FEDERAL COURT,
3 Oct	Diversity of Citizenship, Federal Question	860-871; 28 U.S.C. § 1332 871-874 n.2; 877-886 n.1; 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Optional: Examples of grants of power to state trial courts (IL, MD, PA, VA) Hohfeldian analysis
5 Oct	The Penumbra of Federal Jurisdiction: Supplemental Jurisdiction,	890-892; 28 U.S.C. § 1367; Exxon Mobil [we will review the basic claim- and party-joinder rules, Fed.R.Civ.P. 18, 20, 24, 13, 14, in class; you may wish to peruse them beforehand, but you are not expected to know them well] Hypothetical diagrams (Powerpoint) Note on complete diversity requirement and supplemental jurisdiction
10 Oct	Removal	911-918; 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1446-1447 Hypothetical diagrams (Powerpoint) Optional: HHP removal note Judicial hieararchies (Powerpoint) After class: "All defendants must join"
12 Oct	CHAPTER XI. CHOOSING THE LAW TO BE APPLIED IN FEDERAL COURT, (The Erie Doctrine) MID-TERM REVIEW	Swift v. Tyson, p919; Erie RR v. Tomkins, p920-927 Be prepared to apply Erie to recent complex hypotheticals For review lecture: review notes and assignments preceding this class
	CHAPTER III. DESCRIBING AND DEFINING THE DISPUTE,
17 Oct	The Historical Evolution of Pleading,	121-131, Browse Fed.R.Civ.P. 2-11; Common law pleading examples (declarations) McKinney v. Poulos per Chitty on Pleading Defamation Account Negligence Consider the adequacy of the three alternative complaints in Schmitter v. Gutting ; and of the two claims in McKinney v. Poulos (Illinois is a fact pleading jurisdiction) Elements of fraudulent misrepresentation Elements of international interference with contractual relations IL basic pleading rule IL small claims pleading rule IL pro-se small claims form Contents of small claims form (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.))
19 Oct	Describing and Testing the Plaintiffs Claim,	131-156; 163-182 n.1; Fed.R.Civ.P. 8, 9, 16 Summons in Civil Action form Optional: McKinney v. Poulos complaint Pup v. Butzer Collections complaint
24 Oct	Practical drafting exercise Transferred intent (you were right!) (.html) (Word), but the causation/substantial certainty issue remains with respect to the curb/ground contact	Watch client interview (Web video) (send each of the following documents to civprodocs@kentlaw.edu) Draft complaint (due today, before class) Draft Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a) disclosures (due 7 November) Draft Initial Plaintiff Interrogatories to Defendant under Fed.R.Civ.P. 33 (due 9 November) Optional: Sample complaints from the real world: ACLU, FCC, FOIA, NARM, SEC
26 Oct	Defendant’s Response, voluntary dismissal	189-212; 212-214 Fed.R.Civ.P. 12 Hypo Optional: Sample answers: McConnell, CIA, Vitf Motions to dismiss: e.g.1, e.g.2, e.g.3
31 Oct	Amendments to Pleading Wrap up pleading	214-227; Fed.R.Civ.P. 15; review earlier pleading material
	V. OBTAINING INFORMATION FOR TRIAL
2 Nov	The Promise and Reality of Broad Discovery, The Discovery Devices Christianson v. Bicycle Messengers - Deposition of Bicycle Messangers proprietor Caroline Cascino Bennaza v. Smith - Deposition of Officer Ryan Clay Photographs	332-342; 342-357; skim Fed.R.Civ.P. 26-37, concentrating on Rules 26(b)-(g), 37 Be prepared to participate in a mock deposition of (a) Officer Smith , assuming the deposition was noticed by Bennaza's's lawyer (you), and (b) a mock deposition of the employer of the hypothetical motorcycle-accident victim, Christianson v. Bicycle Messengers, noticed by the plaintiff's lawyer (you). 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. Basic information on the ADA Optional: Proposed rule changes pertaining to electronic discovery (caution: big .pdf file) 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 Subpoena form
7 Nov	Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures	Rule 26(a)(1) drafts due before class today; email to civprodocs@kentlaw.edu You should should prepare Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures for the following party: Center section, back two rows: on behalf of plaintiff Bennaza Center section, front two rows: on behalf of plaintiff Christenson Audience right section, back two rows: on behalf of defendant Officer Ryan Clay Audience right section, front two rows: on behalf of defendant Bicycle Messengers, Inc. Audience left section, back two rows: on behalf of defendant Village of Kenilworth Audience left section, front two rows: on behalf of defendant Yamahonda Review Rule 26(a)(1) Consider discovery strategies in hypothetical motorcycle-accident victim case: Christianson v. Bicycle Messengers
9 Nov	Interrogatories, requests for production, requests for physical or mental examination and requests for production Managing the Scope and Burden of Discovery,	Draft interrogatories due before class today; email to civprodocs@kentlaw.edu Review Rule 33 (you do not need to write definitions; just write the questions) (Same client assignments as for Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures); if you represent the plaintiff, audience-right side prepares interrogatories to be propounded to Officer Clay/Bicycle Messengers and audience-left side prepares interrogatories to be propounded to Village of Kenilworth/Yamahonda Consider discovery strategies in hypothetical motorcycle-accident victim case: Christianson v. Bicycle Messengers 357-380; Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(2) Optional: Example of discovery plan Judge Kimba Wood's model discovery plan Good case on destruction/"spoilation" (html) (Microsoft Word)
14 Nov	Exemptions From Discovery,	380-412 ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct 4.2 Consider likely application of doctrine from assigned cases and notes and of Rule MRPC 4.2 in Christianson v. Bicycle Messengers
16 Nov	Enforcing the Discovery Rules-Sanctions Investigation-Fact Gathering Without Judicial Assistance; recap of major discovery events	415-423; Fed.R.Civ.P. 37 review pp xi-xviii in Rules Pamphlet Select (in class) lead counsel(s) for summary judgment argument on 21 November 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,
21 Nov.	The Nature of the Summary Judgment Device: The Concept of Burden Shifting	424-427; 435-445; 447-448 nn.6-7; Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 "Standardized" Bennaza complaint Bennaza affidavit Christenson affidavit Bennaza's Opposition to Summary Judgment Consider depositions in Bennaza and Christianson cases (posted on 2 November entry) Argue summary judgment motions before "Judge" Topic "Judge" Topic's standing order (.html) (Word) Optional: Example of summary judgment in ADA case, affirming and reversing on two different counts
23 Nov.	No class - Thanksgivng
28 Nov	Pretrial management	465-470; Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f), 16, Official Form 35 N.D. Ill. Local Rule - Standing Order on pretrial procedures Sample pretrial orders: No. 1; No. 2
30 Nov.	Remedies	68-98, Fed.R.Civ.P. 65 course evaluation questionnaires will be distributed a few minutes before the end of class
5 Dec	No class (constructive Monday)
6 Dec.	[Last class] 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).

Avoid Gilbert’s

FINAL EXAMINATION

The final examination in this course will be given on Wednesday, 13 December 2006, at 6:00 PM 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.

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. After attending, you must send me an email, to civprodocs@kentlaw.edu, 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 for unsatisfactory classroom participation, failure to complete the drafting exercises satisfactorily, failure to complete the court visit, or excessive absenteeism or tardiness. I also reserve the power to increase your final 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, or 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.