Mastering Civil Procedure

Home , Colonial Penn, Hanover (schooner), Rosinco

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 1 3/28/17 10:54 AM Carolina Academic Press Mastering Series Russell Weaver, Series Editor

Mastering Administrative Law William R. Andersen Mastering Adoption Law and Policy Cynthia Hawkins DeBose Mastering Alternative Dispute Resolution Kelly M. Feeley, James A. Sheehan Mastering American Indian Law Angelique Wambdi EagleWoman, Stacy L. Leeds Mastering Appellate Advocacy and Process, Revised Printing Donna C. Looper, George W. Kuney Mastering Art Law Herbert Lazerow Mastering Bankruptcy George W. Kuney Mastering Civil Procedure, Third Edition David Charles Hricik Mastering Constitutional Law, Second Edition John C. Knechtle, Christopher J. Roederer Mastering Contract Law Irma S. Russell, Barbara K. Bucholtz Mastering Corporate Tax Reginald Mombrun, Gail Levin Richmond, Felicia Branch Mastering Corporations and Other Business Entities, Second Edition Lee Harris Mastering Criminal Law, Second Edition Ellen S. Podgor, Peter J. Henning, Neil P. Cohen Mastering Criminal Procedure, Volume 1: The Investigative Stage, Second Edition Peter J. Henning, Andrew Taslitz, Margaret L. Paris, Cynthia E. Jones, Ellen S. Podgor Mastering Criminal Procedure, Volume 2: The Adjudicatory Stage, Second Edition Peter J. Henning, Andrew Taslitz, Margaret L. Paris, Cynthia E. Jones, Ellen S. Podgor Mastering Elder Law, Second Edition Ralph C. Brashier Mastering Employment Discrimination Law Paul M. Secunda, Jeffrey M. Hirsch

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 2 3/28/17 10:54 AM Mastering Evidence Ronald W. Eades Mastering Family Law Janet Leach Richards Mastering First Amendment Law John C. Knechtle Mastering Income Tax Christopher M. Pietruszkiewicz, Gail Levin Richmond Mastering Intellectual Property George W. Kuney, Donna C. Looper Mastering Labor Law Paul M. Secunda, Anne Marie Lofaso, Joseph E. Slater, Jeffrey M. Hirsch Mastering Legal Analysis and Communication David T. Ritchie Mastering Legal Analysis and Drafting George W. Kuney, Donna C. Looper Mastering Negotiable Instruments (UCC Articles 3 and 4) and Other Payment Systems, Second Edition Michael D. Floyd Mastering Negotiation Michael R. Fowler Mastering Partnership Taxation Stuart Lazar Mastering Products Liability Ronald W. Eades Mastering Professional Responsibility, Second Edition Grace M. Giesel Mastering Property Law, Revised Printing Darryl C. Wilson, Cynthia Hawkins DeBose Mastering Secured Transactions: UCC Article 9, Second Edition Richard H. Nowka Mastering Statutory Interpretation, Second Edition Linda D. Jellum Mastering Tort Law, Second Edition Russell L. Weaver, Edward C. Martin, Andrew R. Klein, Paul J. Zwier, II, John H. Bauman Mastering Trademark and Unfair Competition Law Lars S. Smith, Llewellyn Joseph Gibbons Mastering Trusts and Estates Gail Levin Richmond, Don Castleman

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 3 3/28/17 10:54 AM hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 4 3/28/17 10:54 AM Mastering Civil Procedure third edition

David Charles Hricik Mercer University Walter F. George School of Law

Carolina Academic Press Durham, North Carolina

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Hricik, David, author. Title: Mastering civil procedure / David Charles Hricik. Description: Third edition. | Durham, North Carolina : Carolina Academic Press, 2017. | Series: Carolina Academic Press Mastering Series | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2017009731 | ISBN 9781611637342 (alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Civil procedure--United States. Classification: LCC KF8841 .H75 2017 | DDC 347.73/5--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017009731

eISBN 978-1-53100-714-0

Carolina Academic Press, LLC 700 Kent Street Durham, North Carolina 27701 Telephone (919) 489-7486 Fax (919) 493-5668 www.cap-press.com

Printed in the United States of America

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 6 3/28/17 10:54 AM For Abby, Alex, Houston, and Julian

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 7 3/28/17 10:54 AM hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 8 3/28/17 10:54 AM Contents

Table of Cases xli Series Editor’s Foreword lxi Introduction and Acknowledgments lxiii

Chapter 1 · Courts Decide Claims 3 Claims Roadmap 3 A. Lawsuits Begin with Clients 3 B. What Is a “Claim”? 5 C. Affirmative Defenses Compared to Claims 7 D. Destroying a Myth and an Important Note About Studying Procedure 8 Checkpoints 9

Part A To Anchor the Action in a Federal Court, a Plaintiff Must Plead One Claim Where (1) Subject Matter Jurisdiction, (2) Personal Jurisdiction, and (3) Venue Are Proper.

Chapter 2 · A Preview of Part A of This Book 13 A. The Three Requirements to Adjudicate an Anchor Claim: Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Personal Jurisdiction, and Venue 13

Chapter 3 · The Foundations of Subject Matter Jurisdiction 17 Subject Matter Jurisdiction Roadmap 17 A. A Divided System of Government: States and the Federal Government 17 B. Power to Resolve a Claim: Subject Matter Jurisdiction 19

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 9 3/28/17 10:54 AM x CONTENTS

C. Which Law Applies Can be Distinct from Subject Matter Jurisdiction 22 Checkpoints 23

Chapter 4 · Federal Question and Diversity Subject Matter Jurisdiction 25 Federal Question and Diversity Subject Matter Jurisdiction Roadmap 25 A. Do Federal Courts Have Power to Adjudicate the Claim? 27 1. Federal Question Subject Matter Jurisdiction under Section 1331 27 a. Federal Question Subject Matter Jurisdiction 30 i. The Typical “Arising Under” Federal Claim: A Federal Statute Creates the Claim 30 ii. Plaintiff’s State Law Claim Necessarily Turns on a Substantial Question of Federal Law 31 iii. Federal Question Jurisdiction if Federal Law Completely Preempts a State Law Claim 36 2. Diversity Subject Matter Jurisdiction 37 a. Section 1332 Requires Complete Diversity and More Than $75,000 Exclusive of Costs and Interests be in Controversy 38 i. Section 1332(a) Requires Complete Diversity 39 (a) Determining Citizenship of a Party 40 (1) When Is Citizenship Determined? 40 (2) How Is Citizenship Determined? 41 aa. A Natural Person Is a Citizen of His State of Domicile 41 bb. Corporations Are Citizens of Both the State of Incorporation and the State of Principal Place of Business, Which Is Where It Has Its “Nerve Center” 43 cc. Citizenship of Other Business Entities 44 dd. Representative Actions: Citizenship of Real Party in Interest 46 ii. Section 1332 Requires More Than $75,000 in Controversy 47 (a) When Is the Amount in Controversy Calculated? 47 (b) The Legal Certainty Test Applies to the Amount Pled by Plaintiff 47 (c) Multiple Claims, Multiple Plaintiffs, and the Amount in Controversy 51 (1) A Single Plaintiff may Aggregate Claims Against a Single Defendant 51

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 10 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xi

(2) A Plaintiff Cannot Aggregate Claims Against More Than one Defendant Unless the Defendants are Jointly Liable 52 (3) Multiple Plaintiffs may not Aggregate Their Claims Unless They are Pursuing a Unified Remedy 52 B. Must the Claim be Filed in Federal Court? 53 1. Claims Arising Under Federal Law 53 2. State Law Claims That Meet Diversity Requirements 55 3. The Discussion Here Applies to the First Claim and all Other Claims but as to Additional Claims, if There is no Diversity or Federal Question, Supplemental Subject Matter Jurisdiction may be Available 55 Checkpoints 56

Chapter 5 · The Foundations of Personal Jurisdiction 57 Personal Jurisdiction Roadmap 57 Checkpoints 60

Chapter 6 · Personal Jurisdiction: Consent, Long-Arm Statutes, Minimum Contacts, and Fair Play 61 Personal Jurisdiction Roadmap 61 A. Generally a Claim-by- Claim, Defendant-by- Defendant Analysis Is Required 64 B. Did the Defendant Consent to Personal Jurisdiction? 64 1. Did the Parties Contractually Agree the Claim Could or Must be Filed in the Forum State? 65 2. For Corporate Defendants, is the Suit Filed in a State Where a State Statute Required the Corporation to Consent to be Sued Over Any Claim? 65 3. Operating a Motor Vehicle Consent Statutes 69 C. Without Consent: The Three Steps to Evaluate In Personam Jurisdiction 70 1. A Long-Arm Statute Must Authorize Service of Process 70 a. State Long-Arm Statutes Apply to Both State and Federal Claims 71 b. Specific Federal Long-arm Statutes Govern Some, but few, Federal Claims 74

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 11 3/28/17 10:54 AM xii CONTENTS

2. If a Claim is Within the Reach of the State’s Long-Arm Statute, Assertion of In Personam Jurisdiction Must Still Not Violate the Defendant’s Due Process Rights 75 a. Did the Defendant, Individual or Corporate, “Consent” to Personal Jurisdiction, Either by Operation of Law or by Contract? 75 b. Was the Individual Defendant “Tagged” with Process While Present in the Forum State After the Suit was Filed? 76 c. Due Process Requires Either Specific or General Personal Jurisdiction Exist 76 i. General Personal Jurisdiction 77 ii. Specific Personal Jurisdiction: For State Claims and Federal Claims Without Nationwide Service of Process, There Must be Minimum Contacts Between the Forum State and the Defendant; For Federal Claims with Nationwide Service of Process, the Defendant Must Have Minimum Contacts with the United States 79 (a) Purposeful Availment or Direction by the Defendant Toward the Forum 80 (b) Relationship Between Claim and Contacts 85 (c) Defendant can Show that, Even if There are Minimum Contacts, Assertion of Personal Jurisdiction Would be Unfair 86 C. Special Issues in In Personam Jurisdiction 87 1. Which Contacts by a Corporate Defendant “Count”? 87 2. Does an Internet Website Count? 88 3. Rule 4(k)(2) and Foreign-Country Defendants 89 4. The Few Federal, Claim-Specific Long-Arm Statutes 91 ii. Specific Jurisdiction: “Sufficient” Contacts, a Relationship between the Claim and the Contacts, and Fairness 92 Checkpoints 92

Chapter 7 · In Rem and Quasi In Rem Jurisdiction 93 In Rem and Quasi In Rem Jurisdiction Roadmap 93 A. The Three Types of In Rem Jurisdiction 93 1. True In Rem 94 2. Quasi In Rem 95 a. Quasi In Rem Type 1 95 b. Quasi In Rem Type 2 96

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 12 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xiii

B. The Same Standards for In Personam Jurisdiction Apply to In Rem Jurisdiction 96 C. How Is Notice Given? 97 Checkpoints 98

Chapter 8 · The Foundations of Venue 99 Venue Roadmap 99 Checkpoints 103

Chapter 9 · Proper and Improper Venue 105 Proper and Improper Venue Roadmap 105 A. Determining Proper Venue 105 1. The Three Possi ble Proper Venues Under the General Venue Statute 106 (a) A district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred 106 1. Substantial Part of the Events or Omissions 106 2. What Does “Substantial Part” Mean? 107 (b) A judicial district where any defendant resides if all defendants reside — or the only defendant resides — in the forum state 108 (c) Venue Based on the Catch-All Subsection 112 2. Establishing Proper Venue Based on Specific Federal Venue Statutes 112 3. There Must be Proper Venue, or Pendent Venue, Over Each Claim of a Plaintiff 112 Checkpoints 113

Chapter 10 · Removal: What Can the Defendant do if the Plaintiff Filed in State Court a Claim over Which a Federal Court Would Have Subject Matter Jurisdiction? 115 Removal Roadmap 115 A. The Foundations of Removal 116 B. When Is a Case Removable? 116 C. What Claims and Circumstances Make a Case Removable? 117 1. Removal on the Basis of Federal Question 118 a. Single Federal Claim in a State Court Complaint 118 b. Federal Claim Joined with Non-Removable State Claim in the State Court Complaint 118 2. Removal on the Existence of a Removal-Type Diversity Claim 119

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 13 3/28/17 10:54 AM xiv CONTENTS

a. Citizenship of Fraudulently Joined Defendants Is Ignored 120 i. Fraudulent Jurisdictional Allegations 121 ii. No Possibility of Recovery 121 iii. Fraudulent Procedural “Misjoinder” 122 iv. The Trump Card: The No Forum-Defendant Rule 123 b. Determining the Amount in Controversy 124 i. Plaintiff Pleads no Specific Amount 124 ii. Plaintiff Pleads Less Than $75,000 in its State Court Pleading 124 iii. Plaintiff Seeks Injunctive Relief 125 D. Deadlines, Waiver by Conduct, and Procedure for Removal 125 1. Deadlines 125 a. The 30-Day Deadline 125 i. Initial Pleading: What Is “Receipt Through Service or Otherwise”? 126 ii. Subsequent Papers: “Receipt” 127 b. One-Year Deadline for Diversity-Type Removal 129 2. Waiver by Conduct of Right to Remove 130 3. Procedure for Removal 131 a. Consent of All Properly Joined and Served Defendants 131 b. Required Filings 132 E. Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand to State Court 132 1. Attorneys’ Fees and Costs 133 F. Removed or Remanded: What Next? 134 G. Post-Removal Actions That Destroy or Create Subject Matter Jurisdiction 134 H. Limited Appealability of Orders Granting or Denying Remand 135 1. Orders Granting Remand 135 2. Orders Denying Remand 136 I. Removal by Parties Other Than Defendants 136 Checkpoints 136

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 14 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xv

Part B Judicial Resolution of (1) Personal and Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Venue; (2) the Merits of a Dispute Without Discovery, with Discovery but Without Trial, and only After Discovery and Trial; and (3) Appeals

Chapter 11 · A Preview of Part B of This Book 139

Chapter 12 · The Plaintiff’s Pre-Suit Investigation Required by Rule 11 141 Plaintiff’s Pre-Suit Investigation Roadmap 141 A. The Purpose of Rule 11 Is to Eliminate Frivolous Legal and Factual Assertions in Filed Court Papers 141 B. Every Document Signed and Filed with a Court, Including the Complaint, Is Covered by Rule 11 142 C. The Represen ta tions Implied by Rule 11 142 1. The Implied Represen ta tion of Reasonable Inquiry 142 2. The Other Four Implied Represen ta tions 143 a. No Improper Purpose 143 b. No Frivolous Legal Arguments, Claims, or Defenses 144 c. No Unfounded Allegations 144 d. No Unfounded Denials of Allegations 145 e. What Must be Investigated? 145 f. Examples With Explanations 145 Checkpoints 146

Chapter 13 · Pleadings: The Complaint 147 Complaint Roadmap 147 A. Historical Role of Pleadings 147 B. The Modern Limited Role of Pleadings 148 C. Requirements for Pleadings 150 1. Technical Requirements 150 2. Substantive Requirements 151 a. Short and Plain Statement of the Court’s Jurisdiction 151 b. Short and Plain Statement of the Claim 151 i. Inconsistent Claims (or Defenses) 156 ii. Pleading Unsupported Allegations 157 iii. Rule 9(b) as an Exception 157

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 15 3/28/17 10:54 AM xvi CONTENTS

c. Demand for Relief 158 D. Who Must Be a Named Plaintiff and a Named Defendant? 159 E. Examples and Forms 160 F. Corporate Disclosure Statement and Civil Cover Sheet 162 G. Conclusion 162 Checkpoints 163

Chapter 14 · Preview of the Four Steps to Analyze Joinder of Claims and Parties 165 A. The Anchor Claim 167 B. The Four Steps for Analyzing Joining Each Additional Claim Against Each Party 169

Chapter 15 · Joinder Step One: Authority in a Rule for Joining the Party or the Claim 171 A. Introduction to the Concept of Authority 171

Chapter 16 · Authority to Join Claims 175 Authority to Join Claims Roadmap 175 A. Joinder of Claims by a Plaintiff 175 1. Joinder of a Claim by an Existing Plaintiff Against an Existing Defendant 176 a. Permissive Joinder 176 b. Mandatory Joinder of Claims by Plaintiffs 179 B. Joinder of Claims by a Defendant Against an Existing Plaintiff 179 1. Compulsory Counterclaims 180 2. Permissive Counterclaims 184 3. Impact of Rule 18(a) 184 C. Procedure for Joining Claims or Counterclaims 185 Checkpoints 185

Chapter 17 · Authority to Join Parties 187 Party Joinder Roadmap 187 A. Joinder of Parties by Plaintiffs 187 1. Permissive Joinder of Parties by Plaintiffs 187 a. Permissive Joinder of One or More Co-Plaintiffs by a Plaintiff 188

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 16 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xvii

i. What Is the “Same Transaction or Occurrence”? 188 ii. What is a “Common Question of Law or Fact”? 189 b. Permissive Joinder of Co-Defendants by a Plaintiff 190 2. Mandatory Joinder of Parties: Rule 19 as a Narrow Exception to Party Autonomy 190 a. How Rule 19 Typically Gets Litigated 190 b. Rule 19: Three Steps with a Venue-Related Twist 191 i. Is the Person a “Necessary” Party? 192 (a) Parties Who Are Necessary to Accord Complete Relief to Existing Parties 193 (b) Parties Who Claim an Interest and Are Necessary to Join 194 ii. If the Person Is Necessary, Joinder Must Be Ordered if Personal and Subject Matter Jurisdiction Exist 195 (a) Joinder Can’t be Ordered if Personal or Subject Matter Jurisdiction is Lacking, but Must be Ordered Even if Venue is Improper 195 iii. Determining Whether a Necessary Person Is Indispensable 196 B. Joinder of Parties by Defendants 200 1. Joining a Party to a Counterclaim or Crossclaim 200 2. Impleader of Third-Party Defendants 202 a. Scope of Rule 14(a)(1) 202 b. Time for Filing and Serving 204 c. Service of the Third-Party Complaint 204 3. Joinder of Additional Claims Under Rule 18(a) 205 Checkpoints 205

Chapter 18 · Multiple Parties and Joinder 207 Multiple Parties Roadmap 207 A. Crossclaims against Co-Parties and Joinder of Parties to Crossclaims 207 B. Rule 14: Fourth-Party Defendants and Beyond 208 C. Misjoinder, Severance, and Separate Trials 209 Checkpoints 209

Chapter 19 · Interpleader: A Non-Party Creates a Suit between Two Parties 211 Interpleader Roadmap 211 A. What the Two Kinds of Interpleader Share 211 B. Statutory Interpleader 212

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 17 3/28/17 10:54 AM xviii CONTENTS

C. Rule Interpleader 212 D. Adjudication of Interpleader Actions 213 Checkpoints 213

Chapter 20 · Intervention: The Only Way for Someone to Force Himself into a Lawsuit 215 Intervention Roadmap 215 A. Intervention 215 1. Intervention as of Right 216 a. Rule 24(a)(1): Unconditional Statutory Right 216 b. Rule 24(a)(2): Rule-Based Right 216 2. Permissive Intervention 217 a. Rule 24(b)(1)(A): Conditional Statutory Right 217 b. Rule 24(b)(1)(B): Rule-Based Conditional Right 217 C. Impact of Intervention on Subject Matter Jurisdiction 218 D. Appellate Review 218 Checkpoints 218

Chapter 21 · Joinder Step Two: Original or Supplemental Subject Matter Jurisdiction Must Exist 219 Joinder Step Two Roadmap 219 A. Is There Original Subject Matter Jurisdiction Over the Additional Claim? 220 B. Is There Supplemental Jurisdiction Over the Additional Claim? 220 1. Step One: Is the Additional Claim Part of the Same “Case or Controversy” as an Anchor Claim? 222 2. Step Two: Even if it is Part of the Same “Case or Controversy” and is not “Contaminated” does Section 1367(b) Preclude Supplemental Jurisdiction Over the Additional Claim? 225 a. Is the Additional Claim Anchored by a Federal Question Claim? 226 i. What’s Not Excluded by Section 1367(b)? 227 (a) No Claim Is Excluded if There is at Least one Federal Question Anchor Claim 227 (b) No Claim by a Defendant or a Party Sought to be Joined as a Defendant is Excluded 227

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 18 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xix

(c) No Claim by a Single Plaintiff against a Single Defendant is Excluded 227 ii. What is Excluded? 228 3. Step Three: Does the District Court Have Discretion to Decline to Exercise Supplemental Jurisdiction Over the Additional Claim? 228 a. The Four Triggers to Exercise of Discretion in the Subparagraphs of Subsection 1367(c) 229 i. Dismissal of an Additional Claim That Raises a Novel or Complex Issue of State Law 230 ii. Dismissal of an Additional Claim That Substantially Predominates Over the Claim or Claims Over Which the District Court has Original Jurisdiction 230 iii. Dismissal of the Additional Claims After the District Court has Dismissed all Claims Over Which that Court had Original Jurisdiction 231 iv. Dismissal of an Additional Claim When, in Exceptional Circumstances, There are Other Compelling Reasons for Declining Jurisdiction 231 b. If One Subparagraph is Met, What Informs the District Court’s Discretion? 231 B. What Happens if the Court Dismisses the Additional Claim? 232 Checkpoints 233

Chapter 22 · Joinder Step Three: Personal or Pendent Personal Jurisdiction Must Exist Over Most Claims 235 Joinder Step Three Roadmap 235 A. Must There be, and if so is There, Regular Personal Jurisdiction Over the Additional Claim? 236 B. If Needed but There is no Regular Personal Jurisdiction, is There Pendent Personal Jurisdiction Over the Additional Claim? 237 C. Assertion of Pendent Personal Jurisdiction Must Comport with Due Process 239 Checkpoints 239

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 19 3/28/17 10:54 AM xx CONTENTS

Chapter 23 · Joinder Step Four: Venue or Pendent Venue Must Exist Over Some Claims 241 Joinder Step Four Roadmap 241 A. Is Venue Proper Under the “Regular” Analysis? 241 B. Is Proper Venue Unnecessary Over the Claim? 242 a. Venue is not Required for a Counterclaim Against an Existing Plaintiff 242 b. Venue is not Required for a Counterclaim Against a Party Joined as a Counterclaim Defendant Under Rule 13(h) 242 c. Venue is not Required for a Claim Against a Third-Party Defendant Joined Under Rule 14(a) 242 2. All Other Claims Require Proper Venue or Pendent Venue 243 Checkpoints 244

Chapter 24 · A Recap and Flow Chart of the Four Steps for Adding Claims or Parties 245 A. A Flow Chart for Applying Section 1367 245 B. The Charts Revisited 247 C. Some Examples with Explanations 247 1. Compulsory Counterclaims 248 2. Certain Permissive Counterclaims 249 3. Joinder of Plaintiffs Under Rules 19 and 20 250 4. Joinder of Defendants Under Rules 19 and 20 252 5. Joinder of a Counterclaim Defendant to a Counterclaim Against and Existing Plaintiff Under Rule 13(h) 253 6. Third-Party Practice Under Rule 14 253 7. Rule 18(a) Joinder of Claims 255

Chapter 25 · Notifying the Defendant of the Filing of Suit through Service, Waiver of Service of Process, or Substituted Service 257 Notifying the Defendant Roadmap 257 A. Formal Service or Request for Waiver of Formal Service 257 1. Formal Service of Process 258 a. Plaintiff’s Counsel Fills Out the Forms 258 b. The Court Clerk Signs and Seals the Forms 258 c. Plaintiff’s Lawyer has Process Properly and Timely Served 258 d. The Process Server Completes Proof of Service 260 e. Plaintiff Files the Proof of Service 260

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 20 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xxi

2. Request for Waiver of Service of Process 260 B. Constructive Service of Process as an Alternative to Formal Service or Waiver of Formal Service 261 C. What’s Next? 261 Checkpoints 262

Chapter 26 · Preview of the Defendant’s Options in Response to Receiving a Federal Court Complaint 263

Chapter 27 · The Defendant’s Initial Set of Options 267 Defendant’s Initial Options Roadmap 267 A. Filing a Motion Under Rule 12 267 B. Filing an Answer 268 C. Doing Nothing 268 D. Limitations on the Defendant’s Options 269 E. Moving to the Details 270 Checkpoints 270

Chapter 28 · An Introduction to Motions 271 Motions Roadmap 271 A. Technical Requirements for Motions 271 1. Writing, Caption, Grounds 271 2. Serving and Filing the Motion 272 B. Briefs, Affidavits, and Other Things Associated with Motions 273 C. The Opposition to the Motion 275 D. The Reply in Support of the Motion 275 E. Court Dockets and Rules on the Motion 276 Checkpoints 277

Chapter 29 · When and Why Must a Defendant File an Answer or Rule 12 Motion? 279 File an Answer or a Rule 12 Motion Roadmap 279 A. When and Why Must a Rule 12 Motion or Answer Be Filed? 279 1. When Must a Rule 12 Motion or Answer Be Filed? 279 2. Why Must a Rule 12 Motion or Answer Be Filed? 279 B. What Must or Can be Raised in a Rule 12 Motion? 280 Checkpoints 281

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 21 3/28/17 10:54 AM xxii CONTENTS

Chapter 30 · Rule 12(b)(1) Challenges to Subject Matter Jurisdiction 283 Rule 12(b)(1) Roadmap 283 A. Two Forms of Attack 283 1. Facial Attacks 284 2. Factual Attacks 284 B. The Impact of Adjudication 284 C. Additional Doctrines Related to Subject Matter Jurisdiction 284 1. A Summary Chart 286 2. Requirements Originating from Article III’s Case or Controversy Clause 286 a. Constitutional Standing 289 b. Ripeness 289 c. Mootness 290 i. The Exception to the Mootness Limitation: Courts May Adjudicate Claims Capable of Repetition Yet Evading Review 290 3. Prudential Standing Requirements 291 4. Other Limitations on Federal Judicial Power 292 a. Rooker-Feldman: Review of State Court Orders go to the Supreme Court, Not Federal District Courts 293 b. Younger “Abstention” 294 c. Colorado River Abstention 295 d. Pullman Abstention 296 Checkpoints 297

Chapter 31 · Rule 12(b)(2) Challenges to Personal Jurisdiction 299 Rule 12(b)(2) Roadmap 299 A. Promptly and Timely Objecting to Lack of Personal Jurisdiction 299 1. Two Types of Challenges to Personal Jurisdiction 299 a. Facial Challenges 300 b. Factual Challenges 300 2. Waiving Objection to Lack of Personal Jurisdiction 301 a. Intentional Waiver 301 i. Pre-Dispute Forum Selection Clauses 301 ii. Post-Filing Deliberate Inaction 301 iii. Filing of Suit 301 b. Inadvertent Waiver: Pleading an Objection to Personal Jurisdiction in an Answer is not Enough 302 B. The Impact of Adjudication of the Motion 302

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 22 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xxiii

C. Not Appearing and Later Collaterally Attacking the Judgment 303 Checkpoints 303

Chapter 32 · Rule 12(b)(3) Challenges to Improper Venue 305 Rule 12(b)(3) Roadmap 305 A. Objections to Improper Venue Must Be Made Promptly or Are Waived 305 1. Inadvertent Waiver 305 a. Failing to Timely File a Pre-answer Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue 305 b. Including the Objection to Venue in a Pleading but Participating in Litigation Before Moving to Dismiss 306 2. Intentional Waiver 306 a. Post-Suit Deliberate Choice to Waive Objection 306 b. Pre-Dispute Forum Selection Clauses 306 i. Raising a Venue Objection Based on a Forum Selection Clause 306 ii. Adjudicating Validity of Forum Selection Clauses 307 B. Procedure for Adjudicating Objections to Improper Venue 307 1. Burdens of Proof 307 2. The Court Must Either Dismiss or Transfer If Venue Is Improper 308 3. Where can the Court Transfer the Claim? 309 4. What if Venue Over Some Claims is Proper? 309 5. No Second-Guessing by Transferee Court 310 Checkpoints 310

Chapter 33 · Rule 12(b)(4) and (5) Challenges to Process 311 Rule 12(b)(4) Roadmap 311 A. The Scope of These Two Rules 311 B. Procedure to Make a Rule 12(b)(4) or 12(b)(5) Motion 312 C. Waiver of Objection 312 D. The Impact of Adjudication 312 Checkpoints 312

Chapter 34 · Rule 12(b)(6) Challenges to Statement of a Claim by Plaintiff and under Rule 12(c) for Judgment on the Pleadings 313 Rule 12(b)(6) Roadmap 313 A. The Limitations in Rule 12(b)(6) 314

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 23 3/28/17 10:54 AM xxiv CONTENTS

1. If the Court Does not Limit its Consideration to the Allegations of the Complaint, a Rule 12(b)(6) Motion Must be Treated as a Rule 56 Motion for Summary Judgment 314 a. What are the “Contents of the Complaint”? 314 b. What if the Court Does not Exclude, but Does not Consider, Matters Outside the Complaint? 315 2. The Plausible Facts in the Pleading are Taken as True: Rule 12(b)(6)’s Burden of Persuasion 316 a. An Example Applied to a Claim 316 b. Rule 12(b)(6) and Affirmative Defenses 317 B. Determining Whether the Pleading States a Claim for Relief 317 C. Procedure for Making a Rule 12(b)(6) Motion 318 D. Responding to a Rule 12(b)(6) Motion 318 E. It’s Hard to Waive the Objection of Failing to State a Claim 319 1. Rule 12(c) 319 a. The Window of Rule 12(c) 319 b. The Same Standards Under Rule 12(b)(6) Apply Under Rule 12(c) 320 i. Burden of Proof 320 ii. Conversion to a Rule 56 Motion for Summary Judgment 320 2. At Trial 321 F. The Impact of Adjudication of a Rule 12(c) Motion 321 Checkpoints 321

Chapter 35 · Rule 12(b)(7) and Indispensable Parties under Rule 19 323 A. Timing of Rule 12(b)(7) Objection 323 B. Facial or Factual Attacks Permitted 323 C. The Impact of Adjudication 324

Chapter 36 · Rule 12’s One-Motion- Consolidation Requirement 325 Rule 12’s One-Motion- Consolidation Requirement Roadmap 325 A. A Party Can Easily Waive Personal Protections 325 B. The Requirement That Certain Rule 12 Objections Be Consolidated in the First Response or Be Deemed Waived, and the Three Exceptions to Waiver 326 C. Special Issues under Rule 12 328 1. One, and Only One, Pre-Answer Motion 328 2. An Exception for Motions Under Rules 12(e) or (f) 329 3. Compelling a Party to Abide by a Pre-Dispute Arbitration Clause 330

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 24 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xxv

D. The Court Can Grant, Deny, or Carry a Rule 12 Motion With the Case 330 1. Impact of Granting a Rule 12 Motion 331 2. Impact of Denial of a Rule 12 Motion 331 3. Carrying the Motion with the Case 331 E. Should a Party with the Choice File an Answer or a Rule 12 Motion? 332 F. Filing a Rule 56 Motion Should Not Postpone the Answer Date 332 Checkpoints 333

Chapter 37 · The Defendant’s Answer 335 Answer Roadmap 335 A. Defense Counsel Must Investigate the Facts and Law 335 B. Defense Counsel Must Address Each Allegation in the Complaint 336 C. The Answer Must Plead Every Affirmative Defense 336 1. What is an “Affirmative Defense”? 337 2. How Much Detail About the Affirmative Defense Must be Pled in the Answer? 339 3. May the Defendant Be Inconsistent in its Positions? 339 4. An Example of Pleading Affirmative Defenses in Pre-Iqbal/Twombly Fashion 340 D. Defense Counsel Must Plead Any Rule 12(b) Objections 340 E. Defense Counsel Must Analyze Joinder of Claims and Parties 340 F. Defense Counsel Must Determine if a Jury Trial is Available and Desired 341 G. Defense Counsel Must Timely File and Serve the Answer 341 Checkpoints 341

Chapter 38 · Rule 11’s Reach and Special Procedures 343 Rule 11’s Reach Roadmap 343 A. Rule 11 Reaches all Papers, but not Discovery 343 B. The Reach of Rule 11 Beyond “Filing” or “Submitting” a Paper to “Later Advocating” 344 C. Two Ways to Raise Violations of Rule 11 345 1. Party’s Motions for Sanctions 345 2. Court’s Own Motion for Sanctions 345 D. The Proper Sanction Under Rule 11 346 1. A Violation Permits but Does not Require Imposition of any Sanction 346

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 25 3/28/17 10:54 AM xxvi CONTENTS

2. Who Can the Court Sanction? 346 3. Determining the “Appropriate” Sanction 347 a. Monetary Sanctions 348 b. Non-Monetary Sanctions, Including Dismissal 348 E. Related Law: Sanctions Under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and Inherent Power 349 1. Section 1927 349 2. Inherent Power to Sanction 349 F. Sanctions Related to Discovery 350 Checkpoints 350

Chapter 39 · Transfer from a Proper Venue to a More Convenient, Proper Venue 351 Venue Transfer Roadmap 351 A. How to Analyze a Section 1404(a) Motion to Transfer Venue 352 1. Venue Must be Proper in the Current District 352 2. Venue in the Proposed Transferee District Must be Proper and the Defendant Must be Subject to Personal Jurisdiction in the Transferee Forum 353 3. The Party Seeking to Transfer the Case Bears the Burden to Establish the Transferee District is Clearly More Convenient 353 B. Procedure to Move to Transfer Under Section 1404(a) 355 1. Is a Rule 12(b)(3) Motion Required to Move Under Section 1404(a)? 356 2. Transfer, Not Dismissal, is the Only Option 356 C. Intra-District, Inter-Divisional Transfer Under Section 1404(a) 357 Checkpoints 357

Chapter 40 · Special Venue Issues 359 Special Venue Issues Roadmap 359 A. The Impact of Forum Selection Clauses 359 1. Enforceability and Interpretation 359 2. Interplay Between Forum Selection Clauses and Rule 12(b)(3) 360 B. Forum Non Conveniens 361 1. International Application of Forum Non 361 2. Narrow Domestic Application of Forum Non 362 3. Appellate Review 363 4. Waiver of Forum Non 363

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 26 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xxvii

C. Venue in Removed Actions 363 Checkpoints 363

Chapter 41 · Amending Pleadings 365 Amending Pleadings Roadmap 365 A. The General Rule Regarding Amendment of Pleadings in Rule 15(a) 365 1. The Right to Amend 366 2. Agreement From the Opposing Parties 366 3. Moving for Leave to Amend 366 a. Rule 15(a)(2): The General Rule 366 B. The Procedure to Amend a Pleading 368 C. The Other Parties’ Right to Respond if Amendment is Permitted 369 D. Rule 15(c) Relation Back of an Otherwise Time-Barred Claim 370 1. Rule 15(c)(1): The Rule Governing Relation Back 370 a. Relation Back Under Rule 15(c)(1)(A) 371 b. Relation Back Under Rule 15(c)(1)(B) 371 c. Relation Back Under Rule 15(c)(1)(C) 373 i. Changing the Defendant or Defendant’s Name 373 ii. Changing the Plaintiff 375 2. How the Question of Relation Back is Typically Litigated 375 Checkpoints 376

Chapter 42 · Lawyer Responsibility for and Judicial Involvement in Case Management 377

Chapter 43 · The First Steps After Pleadings Close: Conferences and Required Initial Disclosures 379 After Pleadings Close Roadmap 379 A. Required Initial Disclosures: Each Party Must Show its Best Hand 380 B. The Parties Agree on a Plan for the Lawsuit at the Rule 26(f) Conference 380 1. When 381 2. What 381 3. Why 384 B. The Rule 26(f) Conference’s Impact on Discovery 384 C. The Rule 16(b) Conference and Order 384 D. Exchange of Required Initial Disclosures 386 1. Exemptions 386 2. When 386

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 27 3/28/17 10:54 AM xxviii CONTENTS

3. What: The Good Stuff Reasonably Available to the Party 386 4. Supplementation 387 5. Sanctions and Exclusion From Evidence for Violating the Rule 387 E. Amending a Deadline in a Rule 16 Scheduling Order: Good Cause Plus 388 1. Amending Pleadings: Good Cause to Amend or Bias To Allow the Amendment? 389 Checkpoints 390

Chapter 44 · Adjudication or Resolution of Claims Before Discovery 391 Adjudication Before Discovery Roadmap 391 A. Default Judgments 391 1. The Three Steps to Obtain a Default Judgment 392 a. An Act of Default: The Failure to “Plead or Otherwise Defend” 392 i. Failure to Plead 392 ii. What Constitutes “Failure to Otherwise Defend”? 392 b. Entry of Default and Setting Entry of Default Aside 393 i. Entry of Default 393 ii. Setting Aside Entry of Default 394 c. Entry of Default Judgment and Vacating Entry 394 i. Can the Clerk or Must the Judge Enter Default Judgment? 394 (a) What Is a “Sum Certain”? 395 (b) What is an “Appearance”? 396 ii. Vacating a Default Judgment 396 B. Voluntary Dismissal 396 1. Voluntary Unilateral Dismissal of a Claim by a Party 396 a. Time for Filing Notice of Dismissal 396 b. Impact of Filing a Notice of Dismissal 397 2. Only one Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice 398 3. Dismissal by Stipulation of the Parties 398 a. Dismissal After Answer or Summary Judgment or Without All Parties’ Consent: Court Approval Required 398 C. Involuntary Dismissal with Prejudice for Violating Rules or Orders 399 D. Dismissal of a Claim Based Upon a Motion Under Rules 12(b)(6) or 12(c) 400 E. Settling the Case 400 Checkpoints 401

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 28 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xxix

Chapter 45 · The Foundations of Choice of Law in Federal Court 403 Foundations of Choice of Law Roadmap 403 A. Federal Power is Limited 403 B. States Authorized Congress to Create Federal District Courts 404 C. Limits on State Power 404 D. The Complexities of Choice of Law 405 Checkpoints 406

Chapter 46 · Vertical and Horizontal Choice of Law 407 Choice of Law Roadmap 407 A. Federal Law and Federal Procedure Apply to Claims Arising Under Federal Law 407 B. State Substantive Law, but Federal Procedural Law, Applies to Claims Arising Under State Law 408 1. The Erie Decision: State Substantive Law Applies to State Law Claims Being Adjudicated in Federal Court 409 2. The Federal Power to Regulate Federal Procedure and its Limitations 411 3. Where We Are Today 414 a. A Validly Enacted Rule Will Control Absent State Substantive Law to the Contrary 414 B. Determining Which State’s Law Applies and Then Identifying the Content of that State’s Law 415 1. Which State’s Law Applies? 415 a. Choice of Law in Federal Courts: The General Rule 415 b. Choice of Law After Transfer of Venue to a Differ ent State 416 i. Choice of Law After a Section 1404(a) Transfer to a More Conve nient Forum 416 ii. Choice of Law After a Section 1406(a) Transfer for Improper Venue (or Lack of Personal Jurisdiction) 418 2. How Does a Federal Court Determine What State Law is — the “Content” of State Law? 418 3. Constitutional Limitations on Imposition of Substantive State Law 419 D. Appellate Review 419 Checkpoints 419

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 29 3/28/17 10:54 AM xxx CONTENTS

Chapter 47 · Discovery 421 Discovery Roadmap 421 A. Purpose of Discovery 422 B. Party Responsibility for Setting the Boundaries for Discovery and Making Initial Disclosures 423 C. Greater Judicial Involvement in and Lawyer Management of Discovery 424 1. Each Lawyer Must Participate in the Rule 26(f) Conference 424 2. New Amendment Requires Early, More Judicial Involvement 424 3. Each Party Must Make Initial Disclosures 424 4. A Discovery Request Is Certified as Reasonable 425 5. Lawyers Must Meet and Confer Before Raising Disputes with the Court, and Must Request a Conference with the Court Before Filing a Discovery Motion 425 Checkpoints 425

Chapter 48 · Scope of Discovery: Relevancy and Other Boundaries 427 Scope of Discovery Roadmap 427 A. Relevancy to a Claim and Proportionality as a Key Limit on Discovery 428 B. Sometimes Even a Request for Information that is Relevant to a Claim or Defense and which is Proportional to the Case is Objectionable 432 C. Privilege and Work Product as Boundaries to Discovery 432 1. Privileged Information Is Protected from Disclosure 433 2. Work Product or “Trial Preparation” Materials Receive Qualified Protection 434 (3) Trial Preparation: Materials 435 D. Other Boundaries 438 E. Enforcing the Boundaries 438 Checkpoints 438

Chapter 49 · Forms of Discovery 439 Forms of Discovery Roadmap 439 A. Requests for Production of Documents and Things 439 1. Obligations of the Requesting Party 440 2. Obligations of the Recipient 440 3. Obtaining Documents from Non-Parties by Rule 45 Subpoena Duces Tecum 447

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 30 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xxxi

B. Requests for Inspection of Land and Other Locations to Parties or Non-Parties 447 C. Interrogatories to Parties 448 1. Serving Party’s Obligations 448 2. Recipient’s Obligations 449 D. Requests for Admission 450 1. Serving Party’s Obligations 450 2. Recipient’s Obligations 450 3. Scope of Admission and Withdrawal of an Admission 452 E. Depositions on Written Questions 452 1. Sender’s Obligations 452 2. Recipient’s Obligations 453 F. Oral Depositions 453 1. Overview 453 2. Procedure for Taking the Deposition of Parties or Non-Parties 453 3. Deposing a Natural Person Who Is Already a Party to the Suit 455 4. Deposing Corporations and Other Entities: Rule 30(b)(6) 455 a. The Procedure for Obtaining a Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition 455 b. Issues Concerning the Designee’s Testimony 456 5. Taking Oral Deposition of a Non-Party by Service of a Subpoena 458 G. Physical and Mental Examinations 459 1. Obtaining an Order for an Examination 459 a. Who May Be Examined? 460 b. When Is a Condition “in Controversy”? 460 c. What Constitutes “Good Cause”? 460 H. Special Issues 461 1. E-Discovery 461 I. Practical but Crucial Big Picture View of Discovery 461 Checkpoints 462

Chapter 50 · Expert Witnesses: Disclosure, Discovery, and Protection 463 Expert Witnesses Roadmap 463 A. Required Disclosures from Parties Intending to Use Testifying Experts and Hybrid Experts at Trial 464 1. An Overview of the Two Rounds of Disclosures 464 a. Disclosure of the Identity of Each Testifying Expert and Hybrid Expert 465 b. Disclosure of Reports of Testifying Experts and Summaries from Hybrid Experts 466

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 31 3/28/17 10:54 AM xxxii CONTENTS

i. Who is a “Testifying Expert” and so Must Prepare a Report? 466 ii. What Must Be in the Report of a Testifying Expert? 467 iii. What Must the Summary of a Hybrid Expert Contain? 468 2. Each Party Must Supplement Expert Disclosures 468 3. Incomplete or Late Reports, Summaries of Hybrid Experts, or Deposition Testimony 469 B. Non-Testifying (aka Consulting) Experts 470 1. The Rule: No Discovery of Consulting Experts 470 2. The “Exceptional Circumstances” Exception 471 a. The Condition Is No Longer Observable and Could Not Have Been Observed by the Party Seeking Discovery from the Consulting Expert 472 b. The Event or Condition Can be Recreated Only at Great Expense 473 c. There’s No Other Expert in the Field Available 473 C. Special Issues 473 1. Deposing a Testifying Expert’s Non-Testifying Assistants 473 2. Waiver of Protection of Non-Testifying Expert’s Opinions 474 3. De-Designating a Testifying Expert 474 Checkpoints 474

Chapter 51 · Adjudication of Discovery Disputes 475 Adjudication of Discovery Disputes Roadmap 475 A. Penalties for Noncompliance with Discovery Requests and Disclosure Obligations 475 1. The Process for Adjudicating Disputes About Discovery 475 2. Adjudicating a Party’s Motion to Compel 477 a. The Process for Moving to Compel 477 b. Violation of an Order Compelling Discovery 478 3. Adjudication of a Party’s or Non-Party’s Motion for Protective Order 479 Checkpoints 481

Chapter 52 · Summary Judgment: Adjudication of Claims Before Trial but Usually After Discovery Closes 483 Summary Judgment Roadmap 483 A. Timing: When Motions for Summary Judgment Can Be and Typically Are Filed 485

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 32 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xxxiii

B. What a Court May Consider in Adjudicating a Motion for Summary Judgment 486 C. The Burden of Persuasion is on the Party Moving for Summary Judgment Movant 487 1. The Burden of Persuasion 487 a. No Genuine Issue of Material Fact 487 i. When Is a Fact “Material”? 487 ii. When Is There a “Genuine Issue”? 488 b. When Is a Movant “Entitled to Judgment as a Matter of Law”? 489 2. The Burden of Production, Not Persuasion, Is Usually What Matters 490 a. How Much Evidence Is Sufficient? 491 D. The Summary Judgment Process: Shifting Burdens of Production 492 1. The Movant’s Initial Burden of Production and the Shift to the Responding Party 493 a. The Burden of Production If the Party Moving for Summary Judgment Does Not Have the Burden of Proof at Trial 493 b. The Burden of Production If the Party Moving for Summary Judgment Also Has the Burden of Proof at Trial 494 2. The Burden of Production Shifts Only if the Summary Judgment Movant Meets Its Burden of Production 495 E. Examples with Explanations and a Flow Chart 496 1. Examples with Explanations 496 2. A Flow Chart 498 Checkpoints 498

Chapter 53 · The Final Set of Required Disclosures: The Pretrial Order 499 Pretrial Order Roadmap 499 A. Pretrial Disclosures Required by Rule 26(a)(3) 30 Days Before Trial 499 B. The More Common, Jointly Prepared Pretrial Order and Commonly Required Additional Materials 501 C. Impact of the Pretrial Order on Subsequent Events 501 Checkpoints 503

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 33 3/28/17 10:54 AM xxxiv CONTENTS

Chapter 54 · Adjudication of Claims by Trial 505 Adjudication of Claims by Trial Roadmap 505 A. Pretrial Motions in Limine 505 B. Juries 506 1. Will a Jury Hear the Claim? 506 a. Is There a Right to Trial by Jury? 506 b. Was the Right Waived or, if Made, Can It be Revoked? 507 c. Power of the Court to use a Jury on Non-Jury Questions, or Despite the Parties’ Waiver of the Right to One 507 2. Jury Selection 508 a. Jury Pools 508 b. Jury Strikes 508 i. Striking for Cause 508 ii. Striking Peremptorily 509 c. Jury Seated 510 C. Trial 510 1. Turns and Burdens 510 2. Plaintiff’s Case in Chief 510 3. Defendant’s Turn 512 a. JMOL under Rule 50(a): aka “Motions for Directed Verdict” 512 i. Timing of Rule 50(a) Motion 512 ii. Two Motions 513 iii. Movant’s Burden of Proof 513 iv. Grant or Denial of Motion 515 4. Plaintiff’s Rebuttal Case and Plaintiff’s JMOL Against Defendant’s Counterclaims or Affirmative Defenses 515 5. JMOL on Issues on Which the Movant Has the Burden of Proof 516 6. JMOL Examples with Explanations 516 D. Conferring on the Charge and Verdict Form 518 E. Closing Arguments 519 F. Charging the Jury 520 G. Jury Deliberation 520 H. Return of Verdict 521 Checkpoints 521

Chapter 55 · After Verdict: In the District Court 523 After Verdict Roadmap 523 A. Options for the Verdict Loser That Must Be Taken before Jury Discharge 523

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 34 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xxxv

B. After the Jury Discharge: Verdict Winner Moves for Entry of Judgment 525 1. Process for Entry of Judgment 525 2. Form of Judgment 525 C. Within 28 Days of Entry of Judgment, the Verdict Loser Must File Any Motions for New Trial and Rule 50(b) Renewed Motions for JMOL 526 1. Post-Judgment Rule 50(b) JMOL Motions (aka JNOV) 526 a. Predicate: Pre-Submission Rule 50(a) JMOL Motion 526 b. Scope of Post-Judgment Rule 50(b) Motion Limited to Pre-Verdict Rule 50(a) Motion 526 c. Burden of Proof 527 d. Impact of Rulings 528 2. Motions for New Trial under Rule 59 528 a. The Two Common Bases for New Trial Motions 528 b. New Trial Awarded Based Only on the Amount of Damages 530 i. Remittitur 530 ii. Additur: Unconstitutional in Federal Court 531 D. Motions to Amend the Judgment under Rule 59(e) 531 E. What Does the Verdict and Judgment Winner Have to Do? 531 1. Did the Verdict Deprive It of Any Relief? 531 2. Respond to the Loser’s Motions 532 F. Impact of Entry of Judgment on Execution and Appeals 532 G. Possible Actions by the Trial Court and the Impact on Appeal 532 Checkpoints 535

Chapter 56 · Obtaining Relief after Prevailing on a Claim 537 Obtaining Relief Roadmap 537 A. Execution of Judgment and Discovery in Aid of Execution 537 B. The Judgment Loser Can Move in Federal Court to Stay Execution of the Judgment Pending Appeal 538 Checkpoints 539

Chapter 57 · Limited Availability of Appeals: The Final Judgment Rule and Its Exceptions 541 Final Judgment Rule Roadmap 541 A. Who Can Appeal? 542 B. When is the Earliest an Appeal Can Be Taken? The Final Judgment Rule and Its Few Exceptions 543

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 35 3/28/17 10:54 AM xxxvi CONTENTS

1. Exceptions to the Final Judgment Rule 545 a. Rule 54(b) 545 i. Adjudication of at Least One of Multiple Claims 546 ii. Express Determination There Is No Just Reason for Delay 547 iii. Express Entry of Final Judgment 549 iv. Waiver of the Right to Seek Rule 54(b) Certification 549 v. Appellate Review 549 b. Collateral Orders 550 i. Conclusive Determination 550 ii. An Important Issue Separate From the Merits 550 iii. Effectively Unreviewable After Appeal 551 c. Orders Granting or Denying Injunctive Relief: 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1) 552 i. Orders Granting or Denying Preliminary Injunctions: Appealable as of Right 553 ii. Temporary Restraining Orders: Generally Not Appealable 553 d. Appeals under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) 554 i. Requirements 555 (a) Controlling Question of Law 555 (b) Substantial Ground for Difference of Opinion 555 (c) Interlocutory Appeal May Materially Advance Litigation 556 ii. Process in the District Court 556 iii. Process in the Appellate Court 556 iv. Waiver 557 e. Mandamus 557 C. The Big Picture 558 Checkpoints 558

Chapter 58 · A Brief Word on Appeals 559 Appeals Roadmap 559 A. Timing of Filing of Notice of Appeal 559 B. The Appellate Process 560 1. Reversible Error and Harm Must Be Established 560 a. Standards of Review 560 b. Harmful Error Is Required to Reverse 561 2. Affirm, Reverse, Render or Remand 562 3. Panel Reconsideration and Rehearing En Banc 562 C. Petition for Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court 562 Checkpoints 563

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 36 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xxxvii

Chapter 59 · Attacking a Judgment in District Court under Rule 60(b) 565 Rule 60(b) Roadmap 565 A. Motions to Reopen the Judgment under Rule 60(b) 565 B. The Six Narrow Bases of Rule 60(b) and the Short Time Limits 566 C. Adjudication of Rule 60(b) Motions 566 1. Rule 60(b)(1): Mistake, Inadvertence, Surprise, or Excusable Neglect 566 2. Rule 60(b)(2): Newly Discovered Evidence 567 3. Rule 60(b)(3): Fraud 567 4. Rule 60(b)(4): Judgment is Void 568 5. Rule 60(b)(5): Judgment has been Satisfied, Released, Discharged, Reversed, or Become Inequitable 568 6. Rule 60(b)(6): The Narrow Catch-all 569 Checkpoints 569

Chapter 60 · After Appeals: Claim and Issue Preclusion 571 Claim and Issue Preclusion Roadmap 571 A. Choice of Law 572 B. Claim Preclusion 573 1. Purpose of Claim Preclusion 573 2. The Elements of Claim Preclusion 574 a. Could the Later-Asserted Claim Have Been Brought in the First Suit? 574 b. Should the Later-Asserted Claim Have Been Asserted in the First Suit: is it the “Same Claim” as one in the Earlier Suit? 575 i. Is the Later-Asserted Claim so Identical to or Closely Related to one in the Earlier Suit that “Should Have Been” Brought Earlier? 575 ii. Was the Later-Asserted Claim a Compulsory Counterclaim in the First Suit? 577 iii. Could the Later-asserted Claim Have Been a Defense to the First Suit That, if Successful, Would Nullify Rights Established in the First Suit? 578 c. If the Party Bringing the Later-Asserted Claim was not a Party to the First Suit, is it Nonetheless Bound by the Prior Judgment Because it is in “Privity” with a Party to the First Suit? 579

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 37 3/28/17 10:54 AM xxxviii CONTENTS

d. Did the First Suit End with a Final Judgment “On the Merits”? 580 C. Issue Preclusion 581 1. Purpose of Issue Preclusion 581 2. Elements of Issue Preclusion 582 a. Was the Same Issue Litigated and Actually Determined in the First Suit? 583 b. Was the Issue Essential to the Judgment in the First Case, Such That the Judgment Could Not Have Issued Without That Issue Having Been Decided? 584 c. Was There a Valid, Final Judgment on the Merits in the First Suit? 586 d. Can Issue Preclusion be Applied Against the Party in the Second Suit? 587 e. Can the Party in the Second Suit Assert Issue Preclusion? 587 D. Procedure for Litigating Claim Preclusion 589 1. Claim Preclusion is “Res Judicata” and So Must be Pled as an Affirmative 589 2. Ordinarily Claim Preclusion can be Resolved by Moving for Summary Judgment 589 E. Procedure for Litigating Issue Preclusion 589 1. Pleading Requirements 589 a. Because Issue Preclusion is “Res Judicata” it must be Pled as an Affirmative Defense Under Rule 8(c) 589 b. Offensive Use: Must Plaintiff Plead Issue Preclusion? 590 2. Litigating Issue Preclusion by Moving for Summary Judgment 590 F. Special Issues 590 1. Co-Pending Suits with Same Claims 590 Checkpoints 591

Part C Special Procedures for Resolving Similar Claims among Many Parties

Chapter 61 · A Brief Introduction to Mass and Class Actions 595 A. Class Actions 596 1. Overview of Class Actions 596 2. Impact of CAFA 597 B. Multi-District Consolidation: 28 U.S.C. § 1407 598

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 38 3/28/17 10:54 AM CONTENTS xxxix

Mastering Civil Procedure Master Checklist 599 Index 607

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 39 3/28/17 10:54 AM hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 40 3/28/17 10:54 AM Table of Cases

A. Kraus & Son v. Benjamin Moore Ahern v. Scholz, 561 & Co., 122 Ahrenholz v. Bd. of Trustees of Univ. Aamot v. Kassel, 398 of Ill., 555, 557 Abbott Labs. v. Gardner, 290 Ajifu v. Int’l Ass’n. of Machinists & A.B.C.G. Enterp., Inc. v. First Bank Aerospace Workers, 400 Southeast, N.A., 579 Aldrich v. New York, 585 Acevedo-Garcia v. Vera-Monroig, Alexander Proudfoot Co. World 538 Headquarters L.P. v. Thayer, 413 Achtman v. Kirby, McInerney & Alexander v. Okla., 315 Squire, LLP, 223 Allen v. Wright, 288, 291 Ackra Direct Mktg. Corp. v. Finger- Allred v. Moore & Peterson, 300 hut Corp., 394 Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hugh Cole ACLU of Nev. v. Lomax , 289, 291 Builder, Inc., 203 Acri v. Varian Assocs., Inc., 231 Allstate Ins. v. Hague, 419 Action Embroidery Corp. v. Atlantic Alper v. U.S., 458 Embroidery, Inc., 238 Alpine View Co. v. Atlas Copco AB, Adams v. AlliedSignal General 362 Aviation Avionics, 312 Alvarez v. Simmons Mkt. Research Advance Financial Corp. v. Utsey, Bureau, Inc., 400 388 Am. Cyanamid Co. v. McGhee, 398 Advanced Magnetics v. Bayfront Am. Express Travel Related Serv. Co., Partners, 546 Inc. v. Beaumont, 203 Aequitron Medical, Inc. v. CBS, Inc., Am. Reliable Ins. Co. v. Navratil, 419 375 Am. Reliable Ins. Co. v. Stillwell, 293 Aetna Health, Inc. v. Davila (1984), Amway Corp. v. Procter & Gamble 32, 36 Co., 468 Aetna Health, Inc. v. Davila (2004), Anderson v. Docuport, Inc., 189 32, 36 Anderson v. Hale, 431 Ager v. Jane C. Stormont Hosp. & Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 488, Training School for Nurses, 466 496 Aguayo v. AMCO Ins. Co., 124, 130

xli

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 41 3/28/17 10:54 AM xlii TABLE OF CASES

Angelo v. Armstrong World Indus., Bank of Augusta v. Earle, 66 Inc., 511 Bank of the Orient v. Superior Ankenbrandt v. Richards, 292 Court, 430 Apotex, Inc. v. Food & Drug Admin., Banks v. Office of Senate Sergeant- 576 at-Arms, 447 Arbegast v. Bd. of Ed. Of S. New Barab v. Menford, 203 Berlin Central H.S., 494 Barrett v. Lombardi, 300 Arizonans for Official English v. Barton v. Florida, 307 Arizona, 290 Base Metal Trading, Ltd. v. OJSC Armotek Indus., Inc. v. Employers “Novokuznetsky Aluminum Ins., 542 Factory,” 89, 97 Arons v. Lalime, 144 Bates v. C&S Adjusters, Inc., 108 Asahi Metal Indus. Co., Ltd. v. Batts v. Tow-Motor Forklift Co., 569 Superior Ct. of Ca., 84–85 Baumgart v. Fairchild Aircraft Corp., ASARCO Inc. v. Kadish, 54 362 Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 152 Beattie v. U.S., 243 AT&T Broadband v. Tech Communi- Becker v. Montgomery, 344 cations, Inc., 554 Beeck v. Aquaslide ’n’ Dive Corp., Atchinson v. Dist. of Columbia, 368 368 Atlanta Shipping Corp. v. Interna- Beighley v. Federal Deposit Ins. tional Modular House., Inc., 128 Corp., 130 Atlantic Marine Const. Co., Inc. v. Belcher v. Basset Furn. Indus., 448 U.S. Dist. Court for Western Dist. Belknap v. Leary, 554 of Texas, 360–362 Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 152, Audette v. Isaksen Fishing Corp., 524 156 Avco Corp. v. Aero Lodge No. 735, Bell v. City of Kellogg, 542 Int’l Ass’n of Machinists, 36 Bell v. Hood, 27 Avista Mgmt., Inc. v. Wausau Belleville Catering Co. v. Champaign Underwriters Ins. Co., 458 Market Place L.L.C., 45 Avita v. Metropolitan Club, 158 Bel-Ray Co. v. Chemrite Ltd., 302 B. Fernandez & HNOS, Inc. v. Beneficial Nat’l Bank v. Andersen, 36 Kellogg USA, Inc., 217–218 Benham v. Rice, 461 B & B Hardware, Inc. v. Hargis Berhard v. Bank of Am., 587 Indus., Inc., 582, 584 Bhaya v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., Bain v. MJJ Prods., Inc., 567 528 Baker v. Gold Seal Liquors, Inc., 180 Bias v. Advantage Int’l., Inc., 488 Bancroft & Masters, Inc. v. Augusta Bird v. Carteret Mortgage Corp., 122 Nat’l, Inc., 84 Bird v. Parsons, 88 Bank of Am. Nat’l Trust & Savs. Bishop v. Okla., 243 Ass’n. v. Nilsi, 197

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 42 3/28/17 10:54 AM TABLE OF CASES xliii

Blake v. Gov’t of V.I. Dept. of Brown v. McBro Planning & Dev. Housing, 550 Co., 530 Blakey v. Continental Airlines, Inc., Brunswick Corp. v. Sheridan, 529 548–549 Blockbuster, Inc. v. Galeno, 597 Budinich v. Becton Dickinson & Co., Blonder-Tongue Labs., Inc. v. Univ. 413 of Ill., 587 Burden v. Gen’l Dynamics Corp., 118 Blue Compass Corp. v. Polish Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 58, Masters of Am., 111 76, 83 Bockweg v. Anderson, 590 Burke v. General Motors Corp., 128 Boeing Co. v. Shipman, 514 Burke v. Smith, 413 Bors v. Johnson & Johnson, 67 Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Ry. Bonerb v. Richard J. Caron Found., Co. v. U.S. Dist. Ct., 444 367, 372 Burnham v. Superior Court of Cal., Bowler v. U.S. Immigration and 95 Naturalization Serv., 349 Bus. Guides, Inc. v. Chromatic Boyer v. Snap-on Tools Corp., 118 Communs. Enterp., Inc., 141 Bracco Diagnostics, Inc. v. Amer- Byrne v. Nezhat, 349 sham Health Inc., 457 Cadent Ltd v. 3M Unitek Corp., 458 Bracken v. Matgouranis, 29 Caiola v. Berkshire Med. Ctr., Inc., Bradgate Assocs. Inc. v. Fellows, Read 414 & Assocs., Inc., 142 Cal. Scents v. Surco Prods., Inc., 507 Branch v. Tunnell, 315 Calder v. Jones, 81, 83 Braud v. Transp. Serv. Co. of Ill., 373 Calderon Rosado v. General Elec. Braun v. Lorillard Inc., 471–472 Circuit Breakers, Inc., 591 Bremen v. Zapata Off- Shore Co., Calderone v. U.S., 494 301, 307, 359 Calista Enterprises Ltd. v. Tenza Breuer Elec. Mfg. Co. v. Toronado Trading Ltd, 236 Sys., Inc., 393 Cannon Mfg. Co. v. Cudahy Packing Brinderson-Newberg Joint Venture v. Co., 87 Pacific Erectors, 310 Canny v. Dr. Pepper/Seven-Up Brink v. First Credit Resources, 373 Bottling Group, Inc., 527 Brokopp v. Ford Motor Co., 519 Car Carriers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., Bromwell v. Mich. Mut. Ins. Co., 134 154 Brooks v. Vassar, 290–291 Carden v. Arkoma Assocs., 45, 273 Broussard v. Columbia Gulf Trans- Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 231 mission Co., 194 Carnite v. Granada Hosp. Group, Brown v. Capitol Air, Inc., 344 Inc., 389 Brown v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 67, Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute, 69 65, 301

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 43 3/28/17 10:54 AM xliv TABLE OF CASES

Carr v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Coast Fed. Bank, FSB v. United Co, 431 States, 556 Carson v. Am. Brands, Inc., 552, 554 Cohen v. Bd. of Trustees of the Univ. Carter v. Macon Manor NRC, LLC, of Med. & Dentistry of N.J., 553 395 Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Caruso v. Coleman Co., 447 Corp., 414, 550 Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis, 135–136 Cohen v. Office Depot, Inc., 413 Caterpillar, Inc. v. Williams, 30, Cohen v. Republic of the Philippines, 135–136 217 Catlin v. U.S., 544 Coleman v. Conseco, Inc., 122 Celotex v. Catrett, 493–96 Coleman v. Milwaukee Bd. of School Century Commodity Corp. v. Directors, 259 Data-Trend Commodities Inc., 41 Collision v. Int’l Chem. Workers Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, Union, Local 217, 531 London v. Warrantech Corp., 232 Colorado River Water Conserv. Dist. Chambers v. Capital Cities/ABC, 443 v. U.S., 295 Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 349 Com/Tech Commn. Tech., Inc. v. Chapman v. Barry, 45 Wireless Data Sys., Inc., 413 Chase Manhattan Bank v. Celotex Commerce & Indus. Ins. Co. v. Corp., 579 Grinnell Corp., 474 Chauffers, Teamsters Helpers Local Commercial Nat’l Bank v. Demos, No. 391 v. Terry, 506 212 Chiquita Int’l Ltd. v. M/V Bolero Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Reefer, 472 First National Supermarkets, Inc., Christian v. Mattel, Inc., 146 436 Chrysler Corp. v. Carey, 478 Competitive Tech. Inc. v. Fujitsu Ltd., Cima v. Wellpoint Healthcare 301 Networks, Inc., 329 Compuserve, Inc. v. Patterson, 89, Clark v. Associates Commercial 295 Corp. v. Howard, 329 Concession Consultants, Inc. v. Clark v. Coats & Clark, Inc., 494 Mirisch, 305 Clark v. Exxon Corp., 367 Conk v. Richard & O’Neil LLP, 122 Clark v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Conley v. Gibson, 152, 156 Co., 52 Continental Cas. Co. v. Am. Nat’l Ins. Clements v. Airport Auth. of Washoe Co., 330 County, 591 Continental Cas. Co. v. Howard, 531 Cliff v. Payco Gen’l Am. Credits, Inc., Continental Training Services, Inc. v. 375 Cavazos, 552 Clough v. Rush, 525 Controlotron Corp. v. Perry Printing Corp., 307

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 44 3/28/17 10:54 AM TABLE OF CASES xlv

Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay, 550 Daniel v. Am. Bd. Of Emergency Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp., Med., 107 141, 143 Dartmouth Review v. Dartmouth Coover v. Saucon Valley Sch. Dist., College, 318 580 Datskow v. Teledyne, Inc., Continen- Corpus v. Bennett, 524 tal Products Div., 312 Correia v. Fitzgerald, 524 Davis v. Precoat Metals, 430, 476 Cory v. Aztec Steel Building, Inc., 70, D.C. Electronics, Inc. v. Nartron 74 Corp., 397 Cottman Transmission Sys., Inc. v. De Aguilar v. Boeing Co., 124 Martino, 107 De Antonio v. Solomon, 393 Coury v. Prot, 43 Debreceni v. Bru-Jell Leasing Corp., Coventry Sewage Assocs. v. Dworkin 64 Realty Co., 48, 50 Dempsey v. Atchison, Topeka & Credit Co. v. Aaron-Lincoln Mer- Santa Fe Ry. Co., 316 cury, 129 Denver & R.G.W.R. Co. v. Brother- Cullen v. Margiotta, 548 hood of R.R. Trainmen, 111 Cunningham v. Hamilton County, Detoy v. San Francisco, 457 545 Devlin v. Transp. Communications Cunningham v. Outten, 585 Int’l Union, 531 Cunningham v. Rothery, 315 DeWeerth v. Baldinger, 568–569 Curtis Management Group, Inc. v. D.H. Blair & Co. v. Gottdiener, 65, Academy of Motion Picture Arts 353 & Sciences, 198 Diamond Shamrock Oil & Gas v. Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. General Comm’r of I.R.S., 213 Electric Co., 548 Dick v. N.Y. Life Ins. Co., 514 Cybersell, Inc. v. Cybersell, Inc., 89 Dickson v. Murphy, 193, 196 Dadurian v. Underwriters at Lloyd’s Digital Equip. Corp. v. Desktop of London, 530 Direct Inc., 550–551 Daggett v. Comm. on Gov’tal Ethics Digital Props., Inc. v. City of Planta- & Election Practices, 217 tion, 290 Daimler AG v. Bauman, 67 Dimick v. Schiedt, 531 DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno, Dist. of Columbia Court of Appeals 288–289 v. Feldman, 294 DakColl, Inc. v. Grand Central DiStefano v. Carozzi N. Am., Inc., Graphics, Inc., 312 299 Dalminter, Inc. v. Jessie Edwards, Dobrick-Peirce v. Open Options, Inc., 396 Inc., 112 Dalton v. R & W Marine, Inc., 88 Doe v. Kerwood, 131 Danial v. Daniels, 48 Doe v. Unocal Corp., 88

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 45 3/28/17 10:54 AM xlvi TABLE OF CASES

Don King Productions, 213 Elk Grove Unified School Dist. v. Donaldson v. Clark, 142–143 Newdow, 291 Donson Stores, Inc. v. American EMI April Music, Inc. v. 1064 Old Bakeries Co., 437 River Rd., Inc., 567 Dove v. Wash. Area Metro. Transit Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc. Auth., 367 v. McVeigh, 34 Drexel Heritage Furnishings, Inc. v. Empresa Lineas Maritamas Argen- Furniture USA Inc., 441 tinas, S.A. v. Schichau-Unterweser Drooger v. Carlisle Tire & Wheel Co., A.G., 362 404 English v. Cowell, 324 Druid Group, Inc. v. Dorfman, 64 Ennis v. Queen Ins. Co. of Am., 128 Duha v. Agrium, Inc., 363 Enron Oil Corp. v. Diakuhara, 567 Dupre v. Fru-Con Eng’g, Inc., 543 EP Operating Ltd. Partnership v. Dura Automotive Sys., of Indiana, Placid Oil Co., 329 Inc. v. CTS Corp., 473 Equal Employment Opp’y Comm’n. Durning v. First Boston Corp., 314 v. Peabody Western Coal Co., 195 Dusenberry v. U.S., 257 Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 410 Eagle v. American Tel. and Tel. Co., Eriline Co. S.A. v. Johnson, 317 53 ESAB Group, Inc. v. Centricut, Inc., Eastway Const. Corp. v. City of New 74, 84, 238 York, 146 Espinoza v. U.S., 259 ECDC Envtl., L.C. v. New York Executive Software N. Am., Inc. v. Marine and Gen. Ins. Co., 437 U.S. Dist. Ct., 229, 231 Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., ExxonMobil Corp. v. Allapattah 509 Serv., Inc., 40, 51, 168, 170, 220, Edwards v. Occidental Chem. Corp., 251 373 ExxonMobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic E.E.O.C. v. Peabody West. Coal Co., Indus. Corp., 293 192 F.D.I.C. v. Bathgate, 200 EFCO Corp. v. Iowa Ass’n of Bus. & F.D.I.C. v. LeGrand, 538 Indus., 37 Feathers v. McLucas, 73 Effjohn Int’l Cruise Holdings, Inc. v. Fed. Dept. Stores, Inc. v. Moitie, 581 A & L Sales, Inc., 394 Fed. Ins. Co. v. Tyoco Int’l, Ltd., 118 Effron v. Sun Line Cruises, Inc., 301 Federated Mut. Ins. Co. v. McKinnon Ehorn v. Sunken Vessel Known as Motors, LLC, 50 “Rosinco,” 97 Federico v. Order of St. Benedict in E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. v. R.I., 561 Phillips Petroleum Co., 539 Ferens et ux. v. John Deere Co., 417 Eichenholtz v. Brennan, 355 Ferrell v. Pierce, 583 Fietzer v. Ford Motor Co., 508

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 46 3/28/17 10:54 AM TABLE OF CASES xlvii

Fink v. Foley-Belsaw Co., 528 Glaser v. Enzo Biochem, Inc., 367 First of Michigan Corp. v. Bramlet, Glater v. Eli Lilly & Co., 78 108, 308 Glencore Grain Rotterdam B.V. v. Fitzgerald v. Seaboard System, 44 Shivnath Rai Harnarain Co., 96 FleetBoston Fin. Corp. v. FleetBos- Global Satellite Commun. Co. v. tonFinancial.com, 94 Starmill U.K. Ltd., 131 Fletcher-Harlee Corp. v. Pote Go-Video, Inc. v. Akai Elec. Co., Ltd., Concrete Contractors, Inc., 319 90 Flight Extenders, Inc. v. Lakewood Goel v. Heller, 581 Aircraft Serv., Inc., 205 Goldlawr, Inc. v. Heiman, 302, 308 Foman v. Davis, 367, 375 Goldwater v. Carter, 285 Ford v. Elsbury, 547 Gonzalez v. Chrysler Corp., 362 Foster Poultry Farms, Inc. v. Int’l Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, Bus. Mach. Corp., 136 S.A. v. Brown,, 76 Franchise Tax Bd. Of Cal. V. Constr. Grable & Sons Metal Prods., Inc. v. Laborers Vacation Trust, 29 Daure Engineering & Mfg., 32 Freeport-McMoRan, Inc. v. KN Grace v. McArthur, 76 Energy, Inc., 218 Gray v. Am. Radiator & Standard Friedman v. New York Life Ins. Co., Sanitary Corp., 73 53 Gray v. Genlyte Group, Inc., 520 Frier v. City of Vandalia, 577 Great N. Ry. Co. v. Alexander, 128 Fruend v. Nycomed Amersham, 526 Great Rivers Co-op. of S.E. Ia. v. Fuddruckers, Inc. v. KCOB I, LLC, Farmland Indus., Inc., 545 537 Great-West Life Annuity Ins. Co. v. Fuesting v. Zimmer, Inc., 526 Woldemicael, 191 Gardiner v. V.I. Water & Power Auth., Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. 197 Bosworth, 355 Gargallo v. Merrill Lunch, Pierce, Green v. Daimler Benz, A.G., 159 Fenner & Smith, 574 Green v. Lake of the Woods County, Garner v. Wolfinbarger, 555 46 Garr v. U.S. Healthcare, Inc., 143 Greyhound Exhibit Group, Inc. v. Gasperini v. Ctr. for Humanities, E.L.U.L. Realty Corp., 394 Inc., 414 Grindell v. Am. Motors Corp., 472 Gen’l Contracting & Trading Co., Grochowski v. Phoenix Constr. Co., L.L.C. v. Interpole, Inc., 302 388 General Electric Co. v. Marvel Rare Grossheim v. Freightliner Corp., 524 Metals Co., 242 Grupo Dataflux v. Atlas Global Gerling Int’l Ins. Co. v. Comm’r of Group, L.P., 40 Internal Rev., 443 Guaranteed Sys., Inc. v. Am. Nat’l Ginett v. Computer Task Group, 546 Can Co., 209

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 47 3/28/17 10:54 AM xlviii TABLE OF CASES

Guaranty Trust Co. v. York, 410–411 Hemme v. Bharti, 208 Gucci America, Inc., v. Gold Ctr. Henderson v. U.S., 258–259 Jewelry, 566 Henshell Corp. v. Childerston, 109 Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v. Henson v. CSC Credit Servs., 315 Mayacamas Corp., 550 Herman v. Marine Midland Bank, Gully v. First Nat’l Bank, 33 473 Gunn v. Minton, 35 Hermeling v. Montgomery Ward & Gust v. Flint, 72 Co., 470 Haas v. Jefferson Nat’l Bank, 194, 198 Hermes Consol., Inc. v. United Hadges v. Yonkers Racing Corp., 143 States, 556 Hall v. Norfolk So. Ry. Co., 374 Hermsdorfer v. Am. Motors Corp., Hamilton v. Atlas Turner, Inc., 302 472 Hanna v. Plumer, 411, 413 Herrera v. Reicher, 585 Hanson v. Denckla, 81–82, 96 Herrick v. SCS Commun., Inc., 45 Harleysville Mut. Ins. Co. v. Packer, Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 44 284 Hess v. Pawloski, 70 Harris v. Balk, 94 Hester Indus., Inc. v. Tyson Foods, Harriscom Svenska AB v. Harris Inc., 399 Corp., 548 H.F. Livermore Corp. v. Aktiengesell- Harrison v. M.S. Carriers, Inc., 207 schaft Gebruder Loeppfe, 396 Hart v. Clayton-Parker and Assocs., Hickman v. Taylor, 434 Inc., 182 Hidalgo v. Fagen, 509 Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection & Hilton v. Braunskill, 539 Ins. Co. v. Quantum Chem. Corp., Hodgson v. Gilmartin, 112, 355, 360 227, 245, 248 Hoechst Celanese Corp. v. Nat’l Fire Hartsel Springs Ranch of Co., Inc. v. Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Bluegreen Corp., 590 457 Harvey by Blankenbaker v. United Hoffman v. Blaski, 353 Transp. Union, 590 Hogan v. Consolidated Rail Corp., Hawthorne Land Co. v. Occidental 548 Chem. Corp., 388 Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Haynes v. Gasoline Marketers, Inc., Circulation Sys., 136 130 Holmgren v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Hays County Guardian v. Supple, Co., 438 231 Holston Investments, Inc. B.V.I. v. Heitmann v. Concrete Pip Machin- LanLogistics Corp., 877 F.3d 1068, ery, 474 44 Helzberg’s Diamond Shops, Inc. v. Home Ins. Co. v. Thomas Indus., Valley West Des Moines Shopping Inc., 308 Center, Inc., 194 Honaker v. Smith, 517

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 48 3/28/17 10:54 AM TABLE OF CASES xlix

Hoopeston Canning Co. v. Cullen, 83 In re New Motor Vehicles Canadian Horizon Unlimited, Inc. v. Richard Export Antitrust Litig., 78 Silva & SNA, Inc., 347 In re Pioneer Hi-Bred Int’l, Inc., 468 Houston Indus. Inc. v. U.S., 547 In re Polymedica Corp. Sec. Litig., Howard v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 518 474 Hunter v. Earthgrains Co. Bakery, In re Sealed Case, 431, 433, 447 144 In re Shell Oil Refinery, 473 Hurd v. American Hoist & Derrick In re Silicon Graphics, Inc. Securities Co., 516 Litig., 315 Hurley v. Motor Coach Indus., 133 In re Zyprexa Prods. Liability Litig., Hy Cite Corp. v. Advanced Market- 598 ing Int’l, Inc., 355 Indianapolis Colts v. Mayor & City Ierardi v. Lorillard, Inc., 456 Council of Baltimore, 212 Iglesias v. Mut. Life Ins. Co., 181 Industrial Hard Chrome, Ltd. v. Ill. Central R. Co. v. Parks, 582, 584 Hetran, Inc., 456 Illinois Central Gulf Railroad v. Injection Research Specialists v. Parks, 584 Polaris Indus., L.P., 111 In re 60 East 80th St. Equities, Inc., Ins. Co. of the West v. United States, 344 555 In re Advanta Corp. Securities Litig., Ins. Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie 158 des Bauxites de Guinee, 302 In re Air Crash Disaster Near New Intamin Ltd. v. Magnetar Tech., Orleans, La., 363 Corp., 144 In re Arthur Treacher’s Franchisee Intera Corp. v. Henderson, 300 Litig., 542 International Shoe Co. v. Washing- In re Bank of N.Y. Derivative Litig., ton, 79 218 Interstate Life Assurance Co. v. In re Blackwater Security Consulting, Sedlak, 211 LLC, 36 Int’l Science & Technology Institute, In re Brand Name Prescription Inc. v. Inacom Comms., Inc., 26 Drugs Antitrust Litig., 423 Ivey v. Wilson, 543 In re Briscoe, 135–136 J. McIntyre Mach. Ltd. v. Nicastro, 85 In re Cendant Corp. Sec. Litig., 437 J&J Celcom v. AT&T Wireless Serv., In re Clerici, 538 Inc., 469 In re Daily, 585 J.A. Olson Co. v. City of Winona, 44 In re Dierschke, 394 Jackson v. West Telemarketing Corp. In re First T.D. & Inv., Inc., 549 Outbound, 418 In re Flor, 556 Jaffe v. Accredited Surety & Cas. Co., In re Keegan Mgmt. Co., Sec. Litig., Inc., 581 349 Jaffe v. Redmond, 433

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 49 3/28/17 10:54 AM l TABLE OF CASES

Jean Alexander Cosmetics, Inc. v. Krisa v. Equitable Life Assurance L’Oreal USA, Inc., 585 Soc’y, 468 Jenkins v. National Union Fire Ins. Kugler v. Helfant, 295 Co. of Pa., 129 Kulko v. Superior Court, 82 Jewell v. Grain Dealers Mut. Ins. Co., Kusens v. Pascal Co., Inc., 515 52 Kyle v. Morton High School, 158 Jin v. Ministry of State Security, 224, Laber v. Harvey, 367 230 Laborers’ Welfare Fund v. Lowery, John v. Sotheby’s Inc., 212 302 Johnson v. De Grandy, 294 LaFont v. Decker-Angel, 338 Johnson v. Heublein Inc., 130 Laguna v. Am. Export Isbrandtsen Johnson v. Oroweat Foods Co., 367 Lines, 502 Jones v. Bock, 317 Lake v. Jones, 590 Jones v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 223 Landon v. Hunt, 144 Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc., 359 Langadinos v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 318 Jones v. Weibrecht, 301 Langsam-Borenstein Partnership by Jumara v. State Farm Ins. Co., 352 Langsam v. NOC Enterp., Inc., Justice v. Atchison, Topeka and Santa 205 Fe Ry. Co., 125 Larsen v. Senate of Commonwealth Jyachosky v. Winter, 308 of Penn., 551 Kalb v. Feuerstein, 54 Latino v. Kazer, 529 Karibian v. Village Green Mgmt. Co., Lauro Lines S.R.L. v. Chasser, 551 231 Lavender v. Kurn, 516 Kendall v. GES Exposition Servs., Lawler v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., Inc., 449 418 Kenneth Leventhal & Co. v. Joyner Layman v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Wholesale Co., 203 Co., 338 Kerobo v. Southwestern Clean Fuels, Leatherman v. Tarrant County Corp., 351 Narcotics Intell. & Coord. Unit, Kerr v. United States Dist. Court, 557 158 Key Bank v. Tablecloth Textile Co., Lee v. Trans Am. Trucking Serv., Inc., 394 43 King v. Pratt & Whitney, 457 Legault v. Zambarano, 344 Kircher v. Putnam Funds Trust, 135 Legg v. Chopra, 414 Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Elec. Mfg. Co., Leroy v. Great W. United Corp., 100 416 Lesnik v. Public Industrials Corpora- Kline v. Burke Constr. Co., 21 tion, 242 Klipsch, Inc. v. WWR Tech., Inc., 590 Leveto v. Lapina, 317 Kneeland v. Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Lewis v. Cont’l Bank Corp., 291 Ass’n, 218

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 50 3/28/17 10:54 AM TABLE OF CASES li

Lewis v. Herrman’s Excavating, Inc., Malautea v. Suzuki Motor Co., Ltd., 460 350 Lewis v. Time Inc., 507 Manguno v. Prudential Property & Lewis v. U.S. Slicing Mach. Co., 152 Cas. Ins. Co., 49 Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Midwest Marder v. Lopez, 314 Cold Storage & Ice Corp., 389 Marex Titanic, Inc. v. Wrecked and Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Wetzel, 544, Abandoned Vessel, 94 547 Markham v. Allen, 292 Lieb v. Topstone Indus. Inc., 142, 348 Markhorst v. Rigid, Inc., 374 Lifshitz v. Walter Drake & Sons, Inc., Markvicka v. Broadhead-Garrett Co., 526 203 Lind v. Schenley Indus., Inc., 528, Marques v. Federal Reserve Bank of 529 Chicago, 397 Lindsay v. Gov’t Employees Ins. Co., Marriott Int’l Resorts, L.P. v. U.S., 224–226, 229 555 Link v. Wabash R.R., 399 Marsh v. Coleman Co., 372 Lively v. Wild Oats Markets, Inc., 133 Martens v. Smith Barney, Inc., 557 Lomano v. Black, 107 Martin v. Automobili Lamborghini Long Term Capital Holdings v. U.S., Exclusive, Inc., 350 471 Martin v. Delaware Law School of Lony v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Widener Univ., 329 Co., 356 Martin v. Franklin Capital Corp. Lopez-Gonzalez v. Municipality of (2005), 233 Comerio, 317 Martino v. McDonald’s Sys., Inc., 578 Los Angeles Branch NAACP v. Los Mas v. Perry, 41 Angeles Unified School Dist., 576 Matrixx Initiatives, Inc. v. Siracu- Louisville & Nashville R.R. v. sano, 156 Mottley, 27 Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd. v. Lovell v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Zenith Radio Corp., 497 Co., 53 Mattel, Inc. v. Bryant, 146, 197 Lowdermilk v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n., Matter of Gober, 584 47 Matter of Yagman, 349 Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 289 Matthews v. Brookstone Stores, Inc., Lundquist v. Precision Valley 302 Aviation, 42 Max Arnold & Sons, LLC v. W.L. Lutomski v. Panther Valley Coin Hailey & Co., 316 Exchange, 396 McCann v. Newman Irrevocable Magnum Foods, Inc. v. Continental Trust, 42, 284 Cas. Co., 515 McCauley v. Ford Motor Co., 49

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 51 3/28/17 10:54 AM lii TABLE OF CASES

McClaughlin v. Fellows Gear Shaper Middlesex County Ethics Comm. v. Co., 519 Garden State B. Ass’n., 295 McCullough v. Ligon, 29 Miedema v. Maytag Corp., 597 McCurtain County Production Miller v. Grgurich, 40 Corp. v. Cowett, 131 Miller v. Mer, 283 McFarlin v. Conseco Serv., LLC, 557 Minn. Supply Co. v. Raymond Corp., McGee v. Int’l Life Ins. Co., 82, 87 338 McGinn v. Burlington Northern R.R. Mitchell v. Forsyth, 551 Co., 495 Mitchell v. Gonzales, 519 McKeel v. City of Pine Bluff, 543 Mitrano v. Hawes, 107 McKey v. Fairbairn, 502 Mitzel v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., McKinnon v. City of Berwyn, 513 423 Meagher v. Long Island R.R. Co., 520 Mobley v. McCormick, 348 Med. Mut. of Ohio v. de Soto, 239 Moe v. Avions Marcel Dassault-Breg- Meehan, 567 uet Aviation, 20 Mendez v. Teachers Ins. & Annuity Mohr v. Margolis, Ainsworth & Ass’n, 212 Kinlaw Consulting, Inc., 307 Mendota Ins. Co. v. Hurst, 579 Monahan v. Holmes, 97 Mennonite Bd. Of Missions v. Monfore v. Phillips, 503 Adams, 261 Montana v. U.S., 573 Mercantile Capital Partners v. Montecatini Edison, S.P.A. v. Ziegler, Agenzia Sports, Inc., 107 184 Meridian Sec. Ins. Co. v. Sadowski, Moore v. Baker, 371–372 49 Moore v. Dixon, 107, 244 Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc. v. Thomp- Moore v. Permanente Med. Group, son, 28 Inc., 130 Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Moore v. Western Surety Co., 347 Smith, Inc. v. ENC Corp., 30, 35, Moreland v. Barrette, 414 197 Morgan v. City of New York, 436 Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. Smith, Inc. v. Manning, 30, 35, Ca. St. Bd. of Equalization, 212 197 Morris v. Princess Cruises, Inc., 120 Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Taylor, 36 Morris v. Wachovia Sec., Inc., 145 M.F. Patterson Dental Supply v. Mosley v. General Motors Corp., 189 Wadley, 159 Muenzberg v. Barnes, 111 Miami Herald Pub. Co. Div. of Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Knight-Ridder Newspapers, Inc. v. Trust CO., 257 Ferre, 131 Munoz v. England, 310 Middle Tenn. News Co. v. Charnel of Murphy Bros., Inc. v. Michetti Pipe Cincinnati, Inc., 52 Stringing, Inc., 126

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 52 3/28/17 10:54 AM TABLE OF CASES liii

Musser v. Gentiva Health Serv., 469 Nowak v. Tak How Investments, Ltd., N. Ind. Gun & Outdoor Shows, Inc. 86 v. South Bend, 315 N.Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Brown, 392–393 NAACP, Detroit Branch v. Detroit NYLife Distribs., Inc., v. Adherence Police Officers Assoc., 576, 583 Group, Inc., 213 Naghiu v. Inter-Continental Hotels O’Brien v. Alexander, 343 Group, Inc., 159 O’Brien v. City of Syracuse, 576 NAS Elecs., Inc. v. Transtech Elecs. Ocean Atlantic Dev. Corp. v. Willow Pte Ltd., 389 Treat Farm L.L.C., 337, 339 Nat’l Bank of Washington v. Dolgov, Office of Pers. Mgmt. v. Am. Fed’n of 548 Gov’t Employees, AFL-CIO, 553 Nat’l Dev. Co. v. Triad Holding Ohio Forestry Ass’n, Inc. v. Sierra Corp., 259 Club, 290 Nat’l Equip. Rental, Ltd. v. Szukhent, Olympia Equipment Leasing Co. v. 301 Western Union Tel. Co., 538 Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pitts- Olympic Sports Prods., Inc. v. burgh, Pa. v. Aerowhawk Aviation, Universal Athletic Sales Co., 419 Inc., 330 OMI Holdings, Inc. v. Royal Ins. Co. National Org. for Women v. Mutual of Canada, 75 of Omaha Ins. Co., 53 Omni Capital Int’l, Ltd. v. Rudolf Nat’l Park Hospitality Ass’n. v. Dep’t Wolff & Co., 258, 260 of Interior, 289 One Beacon Ins. Co. v. JNB Storage Nelson v. Kefer, 49 Trailer Rental Corp., 242 New Jersey Sports Prods., Inc. v. Don Ontel Prods., Inc. v. Project Strate- King Prods., Inc., 212 gies Corp., 355 New Mexico v. Trujillo, 547 Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders, New York Life Ins. Co. v. Taylor, 562 431 New York State Nat. Organization for Orb Factory Ltd. v. Design Science Women v. Terry, 552 Toys, Ltd., 306 New York v. Cyco.net, Inc., 112 Osborn v. Bank of the U.S., 27 Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo- Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Larrain, 43 Kroger, 253 Nivens v. Gilchrist, 295–296 Pacitti v. Macy’s, 430 Nixon v. U.S., 285 Palcko v. Airborne Express, Inc., 330 Noonan v. Winston Co., 78 Palmore v. Sidoti, 292 Norris v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 127 Pan Am. World Airways, Inc. v. Northeast Ohio Coalition for Lopez, 363 Homeless and Serv. Employees Panavision Int’l, L.P. v. Toeppen 81, Int’l. v. Blackwell, 554 89 Paparelli v. Prudential Ins. Co., 457

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 53 3/28/17 10:54 AM liv TABLE OF CASES

Parke-Chapley Constr. Co. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred Int’l v. Holden Cherrington, 565 Found. Seeds, Inc., 232 Parker v. Colombia Pictures Indus., Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 361 388 PKWare v. Meade, 108, 113, 243, 354 Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore, 582, Plant v. Blazer Financial Services, 181 587–588 Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc., 589 Patterson v. MacDougall, 196 Poole v. Textron, Inc. 476, 478–479 Payne v. Brake, 394 Porn v. Nat’l Grange Mut. Ins. Co., PdP Parfums de Paris v. Int’l Fra- 576 grances, 159 Port-Wide Container Co. v. Inter- Peabody v. Hamilton, 76 state Maint. Corp., 396 Pebble Beach Co. v. Caddy, 80, 89 Poulos v. Naas Foods, Inc., 128 Pelletier, 347 Preferred RX, Inc. v. Am. Prescrip- Penn Millers Ins. Co. v. U.S., 375 tion Plan, Inc., 543 Pennoyer v. Neff, 58, 532 Price v. Alfa Mut. Ins. Co., 29 Pennsylvania Railroad v. Chamber- Price v. CTB, Inc., 202 lain, 517 Pro Billiards Tour Ass’n. v. R.J. Penrod Drilling Co. v. Johnson, 111 Reynolds Tobacco Co., 479 People ex rel. Wheeler v. So. Pac. Professional Real Estate Investors, Transp. Co., 467 Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Indus., Pepsico, Inc., v. Board of Trustees of Inc., 144 the W. Conference of Teamsters Protestant Mem. Med. Center, Inc. v. Pension Trust Fund, 111 Maram, 290 Percy v. San Francisco Gen. Hosp., Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust 375 Co. v. Patterson, 197 Peregrine Myanmar Ltd. v. Segal, 194 Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Perez v. Posse Comitatus, 346 Stump, 320 Perkins v. Benguet Consol. Mining Publicis Communication v. True Co., 78 North Communications Inc., 577 Peterson v. Wilson, 520 Publicker Indus. Inc. v. U.S., 351 Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 419 Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Phillips v. Bowen, 526 Auth. v. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., 551 Phillips v. General Motors Corp., 479 Pullman Co. v. Jenkins, 117 Picciotto v. Continental Cas. Co., 225 Puricelli v. CAN Ins. Co., 189 Pieczenik v. Dyax Corp., 72 PYCA Indus. v. Harrison County Pierce v. Shorty Small’s of Branson, Waste Water Management Dist., Inc., 308 547 Pikofsky v. Jem Oil Co., 393 Q Int’l Courier, Inc. v. Smoak, 181 Pinker v. Roche Holdings, Ltd., 91, Quinn v. Owen Fed. Bank FSB, 231 308

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 54 3/28/17 10:54 AM TABLE OF CASES lv

Railroad, Inc., 27–28, 44, 152–153, Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 293 296, 410, 516–517, 584–585 Rose v. Giamatti, 45, 131 Rainbow Mgmt. Group., Ltd. v. Ross v. Rell, 554 Atlantis Submarines Hawaii, L.P., Roth v. Green, 345 208 Rozier v. Ford Motor Co., 567 Raines v. Byrd, 288 Rush v. Smith, 543 Rainey v. Am. Forest & Paper Ass’n., Rutherford v. Merck & Co., 123 Inc., 456 S&W Enterp., L.L.C. v. Southtrust Randazzo v. Eagle-Picher Indus., Bank of Alabama, NA, 389 Inc., 151 Sagent Technology, Inc. v. Micros Rashidi v. Albright, 333, 393 Sys., Inc., 306 Rates Technology Inc. v. Nortel Salgado v. Gen’l Motors Corp., 469 Networks Corp., 302 Salpoglou v. Schlomo Widder, 112 Rector v. Approved Fed. Sav. Bank, Salve Regina College v. Russell, 419 345 Samuel-Bassett v. KIA Motors Am., Red Wing Shoe Co. v. B-Jays USA, Inc., 125 Inc., 356 Santelli v. Electro-Motive, 434 Redfern v. Sullivan, 576 Sanyo Laser Prods., Inc. v. Arista Regal Stone Ltd. v. Longs Drug Records, Inc., 428 Stores California, 132 Saval v. BL Ltd., 50 Reid v. San Pedro, Los Angeles & Salt Schaefer v. First Nat’l Bank of Lake R.R., 517 Lincolnwood, 549 Reiter v. Cooper, 547 Scherer v. Equitable Life Assurance Revell v. Lidov, 89 Soc’y of U.S., 48 Reyes v. Freebery, 550 Schlagenhauf v. Holder, 460 Richardson v. Nassau County, 567 Schmitt v. Beverly Health & Rehab. Rich-Mix Products, Inc. v. Quickrete Serv., Inc., 502 Companies, Inc., 108 Schoot v. U.S., 201 Ricke v. Armco, Inc., 332 Schrag v. Simpson, 347 Ridder Bros., Inc. v. Blethen, 49 Schultze v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., Rios v. Davis, 584 353, 354 Rivera Castillo v. Autokirey, Inc., 530 Schwarm v. Craighead, 229–230 Roberts v. Corrothers, 331 Searock v. Stripling, 443 Robinette v. Jones, 583, 586 Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Mackey, 547 Roche v. Evaporated Milk Ass’n, 557 SEC v. Lucent, 319–320 Rockwell Int’l Corp. v. H. Wolfe Iron Semtek Int’l Inc. v. Lockheed Martin & Metal Co., 446 Corp., 572 Rodick v. City of Schenectady, 143, Senate Select Committee v. Nixon, 21 146 Seven Hanover Assocs., LLC v. Jones Romine v. CompuServe Corp., 295 Lang LaSalle Americas, Inc., 437

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 55 3/28/17 10:54 AM lvi TABLE OF CASES

Shaffer v. Heitner, 96 Sosa v. Airprint Sys., Inc., 388 Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sheets, Souran v. Travelers Ins. Co., 347 116 Southern Boston Mgmt. Corp. v. BP Sheets v. CTS Wireless Components, Prods. N. Am. Inc., 204 Inc., 189 Southern States Rack & Fixture, Inc. Shell Oil Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Sur. v. Sherwin-Williams Co., 470 Co., 367 Southland Sec. Corp. v. Inspire Ins. Shoshone Mining Co. v. Rutter, 31 Solutions, Inc., 157 Shuffle Master Inc. v. Progressive Sovereign Sales, L.L.C. v. New York Games, Inc., 476 Accessory Group, Inc., 204 Silver Sage Partners, Ltd. v. U.S. Dist. Spearman Indus., Inc. v. St. Paul Fire Court, 558 & Marine Ins. Co., 471 Singh v. George Washington Univer- St. Paul Mercury Indem. Co. v. Red sity, 555 Cab Co., 47 Sinochem Int’l Co. Ltd. v. Malaysia St. Paul Reinsurance Co. v. Commer- Int’l Shipping Corp., 362, 551 cial Fin. Corp., 441 Skidmore Energy, Inc., v. KPMG, 143 Stalnaker v. Kmart Corp., 479 Skillin v. Kimball, 524 Starlight Int’l Inc. v. Herlihy, 442 Slayton v. Am. Exp. Co., 373 State Exchange Bank v. Hartline, 350 Smart v. Goord, 353 State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Tashire, Smelt v. County of Orange, 297 38, 212 Smith Pet. Serv. Int’l v. Monsanto State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Cen- Chem. Co., 216 tury Home Components, 588 Smith v. Colonial Penn Ins. Co., 306, Steel Valley Auth. v. Union Switch & 357 Signal Div., 134 Smith v. Islamic Emirate of Afghani- Steffan v. Cheney, 430 stan, 261 Stelax Indus., Ltd. v. Donahue, 239 Smith v. Kansas City Title & Trust Stock West Corp. v. Taylor, 40 Co., 33 Stone v. Dept. of Aviation, 577 Smith v. Kirkpatrick, 576 Stradford v. Zurich Ins. Co., 157 Smith v. Yale Univ., 308 Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 38 Smothers v. Solvay Chem., Inc., 468 Stuart v. Spademan, 88 Snell v. Mayor and City Council of Studio Art Theatre of Evansville, Inc. Havre de Grace, 576 v. City of Evansville, Ind., 583 Snyder v. Harris, 53 Suber v. Chrysler Corp., 48 So. New England Tel. Co. v. Global Sun Oil Co. v. Wortman, 419 NAPS, Inc., 370 Sunview Condo. Ass’n v. Flexel Int’l, Sobley v. So. Natural Gas Co, 514 300 Sopha v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Swedberg v. Marotzke, 397 Corp., 575 Swierkiewicz v. Sorema, 158

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 56 3/28/17 10:54 AM TABLE OF CASES lvii

Swift v. Tyson, 409 Transclean Corp. v. Jiffy Lube Int’l., S.W.S. Erectors, Inc. v. Infax, Inc., Inc., 589 124 Travelers Health Ass’n v. Va., 80 Sykes v. Hengel, 324 Tri-Ex Enterprises, Inc. v. Morgan Sylvester v. City of N.Y., 530 Guaranty Trust Co., 371 Taylor v. CSX Transp., Inc., 243 Triggs v. John Crump Toyota, Inc., Telectron v. Overhead Door Corp., 121 350 Truck-a-Tune, Inc. v. Re, 212 Temple v. Synthes Corp., Ltd., 193 Trustees of the Univ. of Pennsylvania Tesser v. Bd. of Ed., 528 v. Mayflower Transit, Inc., 319 Testa v. Katt, 54 Tull v. U.S., 506 Tex. Railroad Comm’n. v. Pullman, Turner v. CF&I Steel Corp., 196 296 Uffner v. La Reunion Francaise, S.A., Theilmann v. Rutland Hospital, Inc., 107 399 United Mine Workers of Am. v. Thesleff v. Harvard Trust Co., 47 Gibbs, 223 Thomas v. Capital Security Serv., United States v. Dist. Council of New Inc., 143 York City and Vicinity of the Thompson v. Altheimer & Gray, 509 United Brotherhood of Carpen- Thompson v. Dep’t of Housing & ters and Joiners of Am., 436 Urban Dev., 431 United States v. J.M. Taylor, 456 Thompson v. Duke, 143 United Steelworkers of Am. v. R.H. Thompson v. Haskell Co., 472 Bouligny, Inc., 45 Ticketmaster-New York, Inc. v. Unitherm Food Sys., Inc. v. Swift- Alioto, 86 Eckrich, 526 Tinius v. Carroll County Sheriff Univ. of S. Ala. v. Am. Tobacco Co., Dept., 229 398 Toms v. Links Sports Mgmt. Group, Univ. of Tex. v. Vratil, 448 L.P., 431 Upjohn Co. v. U.S., 434 Tongkook Am. v. Shipton Sportswear U.S. v. United Shoe Machinery Co., 47 Corp., 433 Too, Inc. v. Kohl’s Dept. Stores, Inc., U.S. E.E.O.C. v. Caesars Entertain- 8, 18, 35, 41, 49, 60, 82, 91, 142, ment, Inc., 457 147, 156, 167, 192, 195, 204, 207, U.S. ex rel. Bilyew v. Franzen, 562 223, 235, 264, 290, 302, 309, 330, U.S. ex rel. Englund v. Los Angeles 333, 423, 427, 477, 503, 506, 518, County, 451 530–531, 544, 548, 557 U.S. ex rel. Tiesinga v. Dianon Touchcom, Inc. v. Bereskin & Parr, Systems, Inc., 457 90 U.S. v. An Article of Drug, 530 U.S. v. Botefuhr, 237

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 57 3/28/17 10:54 AM lviii TABLE OF CASES

U.S. v. Diabetes Treatment Centers of Warth v. Sedlin, 291 Am., Inc., 544, 551, 558 Washington State Physicians Ins. U.S. v. First Nat’l Bank of Circle, 388, Exchange & Ass’n. v. Fisons Corp., 502 445 U.S. v. Indrelunas, 544 Wasson v. Riverside County, 311 U.S. v. Konovsky, 583 Watergate Landmark Condo. Unit U.S. v. Mercedes-Benz of North Am., Owner’s Ass’n v. Wiss, Janey, 398 Elstner Ass’n., 203 U.S. v. Reyes, 400 Watson v. Blankinship, 188 U.S. v. Reynolds, 433 Watson v. City of Newark, 542 U.S. v. Rice, 135 Weathington v. United Behavioral U.S. v. Sioux Nation, 589 Health, 134 U.S. v. Swiss Am. Bank, Ltd., 90 Weiss v. Nat’l Westminster Bank, Ushman v. Sterling Drug, Inc., 129 PLC, 437 Valdes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 133 Wennik v. Polygram Group Distrib., Valentinn v. Hosp. Bella Vista, 41 Inc., 524 Van Dusen v. Barrack, 356, 416 Whole Women’s Health v. Lakey, 468 Vance v. U.S., 470 Wickstrom v. Ebert, 393 Vereda, Ltda. v. United States, 555 Wight v. Bankamerica Corp., 158 Verizon Md., Inc. v. Global Naps, Wild v. Subscription Plus, Inc., 308 Inc., 35 Wilderness Soc’y v. Alcock, 288 Versa Prods., Inc. v. Home Depot, Will v. Hallock, 550 USA, Inc., 399 Will v. United States, 557 Viacom, Inc. v. Harbridge Merchant Williams v. Bd. Of City Comm’rs., Servs., Inc., 156 448 Vines v. Univ. of La. at Monroe, 582 Williams v. Kleppe, 49 Vitalo v. Cabot Corp., 468 Williams v. Lehigh Valley R.R. Co., VMS/PCA Ltd. Partnership v. PCA 456 Partners Ltd. Partnership, 352 Williams v. Runyon, 527 Von Zuckerstein v. Argonne Nat’l Williamson v. Consol. Rail Corp., Lab., 514 529 Vt. Teddy Bear Co. v. 1-800 Bear- Wilson v. Belin, 73 gram Co., 391 Wilson v. Lakner, 456 Vuitton v. White, 553 Wilson v. U.S., 356 Walden v. Fiore, 80 Wise v. Wachovia Securities, LLC, 45 Walker v. Armco Steel Corp., 414 Wood v. Worachek, 374 Walker v. Norwest Corp., 145 Woods v. Interstate Realty Co, 412 Walkill 5 Assocs. II v. Tectonic Eng’r, Workman v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 519 P.C., 203–204 World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Warger v. Shauers, 520, 524 Woodson, 58, 84

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 58 3/28/17 10:54 AM TABLE OF CASES lix

Yannacopoulos v. Gen’l Dynamics Zielinski v. Philadelphia Piers, Inc., Corp., 543 336 Yavuz v. 61 MM, Ltd., 361 Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Young & Assocs. Public Relations, Inc., 88 LLC v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 512 Zubalake v. UBS Warburg LLC, 461 Young v. Lepone, 375 Younger v. Harris, 295

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 59 3/28/17 10:54 AM hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 60 3/28/17 10:54 AM Series Editor’s Foreword

The Carolina Academic Press Mastering Series is designed to provide you with a tool that will enable you to easily and efficiently “master” the substance and content of law school courses. Throughout the series, the focus is on qual- ity writing that makes legal concepts understandable. As a result, the series is designed to be easy to read and is not unduly cluttered with footnotes or cites to secondary sources. In order to facilitate student mastery of topics, the Mastering Series includes a number of pedagogical features designed to improve learning and retention. At the beginning of each chapter, you will find a “Roadmap” that tells you about the chapter and provides you with a sense of the material that you will cover. A “Checkpoint” at the end of each chapter encourages you to stop and review the key concepts, reiterating what you have learned. Throughout the book, key terms are explained and emphasized. Finally, a “Master Checklist” at the end of each book reinforces what you have learned and helps you identify any areas that need review or further study. We hope that you will enjoy studying with, and learning from, the Master- ing Series.

Russell L. Weaver Professor of Law & Distinguished University Scholar University of Louisville, Louis D. Brandeis School of Law

lxi

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 61 3/28/17 10:54 AM hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 62 3/28/17 10:54 AM Introduction and Acknowledgments

This book is the product of 15 years of teaching civil procedure on top of almost 30 doing federal civil litigation. It is designed to bring the practical aspects of civil procedure in focus while addressing the policy issue often focused on in law school. Profound thanks to Cindy Schiesel at Palo Verde High School and Ruth Gardner at the University of Arizona for helping me learn to write more clearly.

lxiii

hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 63 3/28/17 10:54 AM hricik 3e 00 fmt f2.indd 64 3/28/17 10:54 AM