Michael Green's CivPro Blog

Multiple Choice Question from the 2006 Civ Pro Exam

9.            P (a citizen of New York) files a complaint against D (a citizen of New Jersey) in the Federal District Court for the District of New Jersey on January 1, 2005. P’s complaint is for battery. P alleges that D, a New Jersey state trooper, committed battery in connection with D’s arrest of P in New Jersey on January 2, 2003. P serves D in hand while D is at his office in New Jersey. This manner of service is adequate under New Jersey law. D makes a pre-answer motion to dismiss on the grounds of inadequate service. This motion is denied by the court. D then serves an answer on P. The answer includes the defense that P’s action is outside New Jersey’s 2 year statute of limitations. Under New Jersey law, a statute of limitations is tolled on service. D’s answer also includes a counterclaim against P for breach of an unrelated contract. Which of the following is most accurate?

a.     D’s statute of limitations defense should fail. D waived this defense putting a permissive counterclaim in his answer.

b.     The district court was correct to deny D’s motion to dismiss for inadequate service. Because P’s action is under diversity, state service rules apply.

c.     The district court was wrong to deny D’s motion to dismiss for inadequate service. According to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(2), “service may be effected by any person who is not a party and who is at least 18 years of age.”

d.     D’s statute of limitations defense should fail because it was waived by not being joined with P’s motion to dismiss for inadequate service.

e.    D’s statute of limitations defense should fail because, under federal law, a statute of limitations is tolled on filing, not service. 

Easy Multiple Choice Question from 2006 Civ Pro Exam

6.            P (a citizen of New York) sues D (a citizen of New Jersey) for $80,000 under New York battery law in the Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York concerning a brawl between P and D that occurred in New York City. D joins his insurer I (a New York corporation with its principal place of business in New Jersey) under Rule 14. Which of the following is most accurate?

a.     There is federal subject matter jurisdiction for both P’s action against D and D’s action against I.

b.     D’s action against I should be dismissed for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. P’s action against D has federal subject matter jurisdiction and can remain in federal court.

c.     D’s action against I should be dismissed for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction. Furthermore, P’s action against D should also be dismissed for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction, since it is “contaminated” by D’s action against I.

d.     P’s action against D should be dismissed for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction because P is an in-state plaintiff. Once P’s action is dismissed, D’s action against I will also have to be dismissed for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

e.     P’s action against D should be dismissed for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction because P is an in-state plaintiff. Once P’s suit is dismissed, the court may at its discretion choose to retain or dismiss D’s action against I.

Afrikan Spir and Josephine Meckseper

Recently I stumbled across a piece by the German artist Josephine Meckseper entitled "Afrikan Spir." Spir was an obsure Russian Neo-Kantian philosopher, who I've argued was an important influence on Nietzsche. I thought that no one outside a small circle of Nietzsche scholars knew about him at all. Why she chose to name the piece after him is a mystery.

Multiple Choice Question from the 2007 Civ Pro Exam

9.    P, an employee of the D Corp, is suing the D Corp in federal court concerning the damages P sustained from a large industrial accident at a D Corp plant. Many people were severely injured in the accident, which was apparently the result of the introduction of a new chemical into the fuel used by the plant’s machinery. Which of the following is least likely to be D Corp work product under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 and/or Hickman?
    
a.    A memo drafted by the D Corp’s trial counsel for the D Corp’s in-house counsel concerning the strategy to pursue in the D Corp’s defense against P. 
b.    A tape recording of a witness’s recollections of the accident. The witness is now deceased. The tape was made by a private detective hired by the D Corp. soon after the accident.
c.    An account of the probable causes of the accident, drafted soon after the accident occurred by a D Corp engineer for the Chief Executive Officer of the D Corp.
d.    The minutes of a meeting, attended by the D Corp’s in-house counsel, during which it was decided to introduce the new chemical to the fuel. 
e.    A video of P gardening, clandestinely made by a private detective hired by trial counsel for the D Corp in the hopes of demonstrating that P’s injuries are less than P alleges in his complaint.

Older Video on Raz

Thought I would post this older video of a symposium I participated in at Princeton's James Madison Program on the 20th Anniversary of Joseph Raz's Morality of Freedom. 

Llewellyn and Legal Realism

My review of Karl Llewellyn, The Theory of Rules (edited by Fred Schauer) has just been posted on Jotwell: Jurisprudence.

Multiple Choice Question from the 2007 Civ Pro Exam

3.    Which of the following cases is most likely to have federal subject matter jurisdiction? In each case, the amount in controversy for each plaintiff’s claim against each defendant is $100,000.
    
a.    P is a French citizen admitted for permanent residency in the U.S. who is domiciled in New York. P sues D, a German admitted for permanent residency in the U.S. who is domiciled in New Jersey. P’s suit is for violation of New York negligence law.

b.    P, a French citizen domiciled in France, sues D, a German domiciled in Germany. P’s suit is for violation of federal securities law.

c.    P1, a New York citizen, and P2, a California citizen, sue D, a California citizen, for violations of New York negligence law.

d.    P, a California citizen, claims to be a beneficiary of the estate of X, a California citizen who recently died. P’s suit is under California law and names D, the executor of X’s estate, as the defendant. D is a citizen of Nevada. 

e.    P, a California citizen, sues D1, a New York citizen, and D2, a California citizen, for violations of New York negligence law.