Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules Chart
STAGE
ISSUE
RULE
DESCRIPTION
FRCP Values
FRCP 1
Purpose of FRCP is to secure just, speedy, and
inexpensive determinations of
actions/proceedings
Service
FRCP 4



Complaint
FRCP 8(a)
RELATED CASES/RULES
GENERAL
PLEADING
Answer: Admit/Deny
FRCP 8(b)
Answer: Affirmative
Defenses
FRCP 8(c)
Pleadings: Simple,
Concise and Direct
Pleadings: Construing
FRCP 8(d)
Pleading Special
Matters – Fraud
FRCP 9(b)
Caption
FRCP 10
FRCP 8(e)
(c) Personal Service
(d) Waiver
(m) Time limit – 120 days after filing
complaint
 Personal Jx is the same in federal court as in
state court
 Function: Notice
 Requires short & plain statement of: (1)
grounds for jurisdiction; (2) the claim
showing entitled to relief; and (3) demand
for the relief sought
 (1)(A) & (B) Defendant must state
affirmative defenses and admit/deny
allegations
 (5) Lack knowledge or information"" →
Effect of a denial
 (6) Failure to deny → Admitted
 Some affirmative defenses (not exclusive):
Contributory negligence; fraud; res judicata;
statute of frauds; statute of limitations
 Admit/deny allegations
Allegations must be simple, concise, and direct


Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly

King’s Pay-Per-View v. J.C.
Dimitri’s
Carter v. US

“Pleadings must be construed so as to do
justice.”
 “In alleging fraud or mistake, a party must
state with particularity the circumstances
constituting fraud or mistake…”
 Just FYI, must go beyond Rule 8 for fraud
 Caption req’d for pleadings
1
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules Chart
STAGE
ISSUE
RULE
DESCRIPTION
Signature
FRCP 11(a), (b)


Sanctions
FRCP 11(c)




Answer: Time
FRCP 12(a)
Motion to Dismiss
FRCP 12(b)












Motion – Judgment on
Pleadings
Motion – Other
FRCP 12(c)
FRCP 12(e)





(a) Atty signature
(b) By signing, claiming that a pleading is
brought in good faith, have reasonable basis
in fact and law
Subject to sanctions if the court finds that
you did not in fact bring it in good faith
Party Initiated or Sua Sponte
Party-initiated: 21-day safe harbor
provision, objective reasonableness standard
Sua Sponte: No safe harbor, objective
reasonableness or subjective good faith
Does not apply to discovery
If service is waived → ∆ gets 60 days
If service is not waived → ∆ gets 20 days
Challenges the sufficiency of the complaint,
does not meet the Rule 8 requirements
(1) Lack of subject matter Jx
(2) Lack of personal Jx
(3) Improper venue
(4) Insufficient process
(5) Insufficient service of process
(6) Failure to state a claim upon which relief
can be granted
(7) Failure to join a party under Rule 19
A failure to raise (2)-(5) waives those
defenses – others can be raised throughout
litigation
Occurs after the pleadings have closed
Court will examine all pleadings and
determine if judgment in favor of either
party is appropriate
Either party can make this motion
Motion for a More Definite Statement
Must be so vague or ambiguous that the
party cannot respond
RELATED CASES/RULES




Patsy's Brand, Inc. v. I.O.B.
Realty, Inc.
In re Pennie & Edmonds LLP
Frantz v. United States
Powerlifting Federation
Rule 37 (for discovery sanctions)
2
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules Chart
STAGE
ISSUE
RULE
DESCRIPTION
Motion – Other
FRCP 12(f)


Amendment
FRCP 15




Jury Demand
FRCP 38(b)

Deference to States
FRCP 4

Due Process
14th Amendment
(Section 1)
Federal District Court
Venue
Improper Venue
28 U.S.C. §1391
Inconvenient Venue
28 U.S.C. §1404
US Supreme Court
Article III
Not common
Motion to Strike – Insufficient defense or
redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or
scandalous matter
Not common
Amendments as a matter of course (within
20 days of serving the pleadings)
Other amendments – after 20 days runs out
(c) If after Statute of Limitations has ran,
must relate back to original claim(s)
If you want a jury, put a demand in your
pleading
RELATED CASES/RULES


Dubicz v. Commonwealth
Edison Co.
Tran v. Alphonse Hotel Corp.

Piper Aircraft v. Reyno
PERSONAL JX
For personal jurisdiction in federal court
refer to state statute
“…Nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law…”
VENUE
28 U.S.C. §1406(a)








(a) Diversity of citizenship
(b) Federal question
District Court can dismiss
District Court can transfer to another DC
where it could have been brought
Can only transfer to another federal court
Transfer for convenience
Number of factors to consider
Can only transfer to another federal court
SUBJECT
MATTER JX



Constitutional authority
Allows Π’s claims and Δ’s defenses under
federal question
Anything that raises a federal question in
defense can go
3
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules Chart
STAGE
ISSUE
RULE
DESCRIPTION
RELATED CASES/RULES
District Court – Federal
Question
28 U.S.C. §1331


Only Π’s claims for federal question
“Well-pleaded complaint rule”

District Court –
Diversity
28 U.S.C. §1332


Complete diversity of parties
Amount in controversy over $75,000
Supplemental Jx
28 U.S.C. §1367

Bring in state claims & add’l Δs as long as
they arise out of the same case/controversy
under Article III
Must still have complete diversity
Can go with only one Π that meets the
amount in controversy requirement
Allows Δ to move to federal court if Π
could’ve brought the case there first
Time limits
In federal question cases, citizenship is
irrelevant
In diversity cases, no Δs can be a citizen of
the state where the action is brought


Removal to Federal
Court
28 U.S.C. §1441










Louisville & Nashville Railroad
v. Mottley
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals v.
Thompson
Grable & Sons v. Darue
Sheehan v. Gustafson
Peterson v. Cooley
Del Vecchio v. Conseco
Exxon Mobil v. Allapattah

Spencer v. US District Court for
the Northern District of CA

Phillips v. General Motors


Sanyo v. Arista Records
Aubuchon v. Benefirst
DISCOVERY
Motion for a Protective
Order
Mandatory Initial
Disclosure
FRCP 26(c)

Judge can order to cease asking
FRCP 26(a)

Each party must disclose the identity of
witnesses and documents, unless it would
be used solely for impeachment
Should occur within 14 days of discovery
conference
(2)(A) Expert disclosure
(2)(B) Written report
(2)(C) Court-ordered deadline or 90 days
before trial

Expert Discovery
FRCP 26(a)
Relevancy
FRCP 26(b)(1)



4
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules Chart
STAGE
ISSUE
RULE
E-Discovery
Expert Deposition
Discovery Conference
Signature and
Sanctions
Depositions
Interrogatories
Requests for
Production
Physical & Mental
Exams
Requests for Admission
Motion to Compel
FRCP 26(b)(2)(B)
FRCP 26(b)(4)
FRCP 26(f)
FRCP 26(g)
Sanctions
FRCP 37
Subpoenas
FRCP 45
Scheduling Order
FRCP 16(b)
DESCRIPTION
RELATED CASES/RULES



Gonsalves v. City of New
Bedford

National Hockey League v.
Metro Hockey League

Tower Ventures v. City of
Westfield
Acuna v. Brown & Root
Riccuiti v. NY City Transit
Authority
(1) Signature
(2) Sanctions
FRCP 30-32
FRCP 33
FRCP 34
FRCP 35
FRCP 36
FRCP 37(a)


(a) Minor sanctions
(b) Major sanctions

(3) Required deadlines: Joining parties,
amending pleadings, filing motions,
completing discovery
(3) Permitted deadlines: Providing Rule 26
disclosures, Scheduling pretrial
conferences, starting trial
(4) Can be modified only for good cause
and with judge’s consent
(c) Conferences
(d) Orders
Usually held after the completion of
discovery
Focuses on the conduct of the trial
CASE
MANAGEMENT,
SETTLEMENT,
& ADR


Pretrial Conferences
and Orders
Final Pretrial
Conference & Order
FRCP 16(c), (d)
FRCP 16(e)







R.M.R. v. Muscogee County
School District
5
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules Chart
STAGE
ISSUE
RULE
DESCRIPTION

Sanctions
FRCP 16(f)



Settlement – Damages
Limitation
FRCP 68



Most judges require the parties to submit a
joint trial plan
Sanctions for failure to appear at pretrial
conference
Sanctions for failure to be prepared for
pretrial conference
Sanctions for failure to comply with
scheduling order
If a claimant does not accept the Δ’s offer
and does not do better in the end, the Π is
liable for the Δ’s “post-offer” costs (usually
not attorney’s fees)
Costs: filing fees, etc.
Fees: attorney’s fees
RELATED CASES/RULES

Mareck v. Chesney


Chauffeurs v. Terry
Markman v. Westview
Instruments, Inc.

Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete
Co.
JUDGE & JURY
Right to Jury
7th Amendment

Only applies to the federal government –
not incorporated to apply to the states
Jury Demand
FRCP 38(b)

Jury Composition
Jury Selection –
Peremptory Challenges
FRCP 48
FRCP 47(b)
28 U.S.C. §1870


Must file no later than 10 days after the last
pleading directed to the issue is served
Must be composed of 6-12 members
Lawyers’ opportunity to strike without
explanation or cause
Limited
Can’t be race-based
May excuse for good cause
Members of the panel show themselves
incapable of performing their factfinding
tasks
Unlimited
The court determines the content of jury
instructions
Failure to object → Waived
Jury Selection –
Excuses for Cause
FRCP 47(c)
Jury Instructions
FRCP 49, 51







6
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules Chart
STAGE
ISSUE
RULE
DESCRIPTION
RELATED CASES/RULES
Judgment as a Matter
of Law
FRCP 50(a)


Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing


Celotex v. Catrett
Scott v. Harris

Unitherm v. Swift

Renewed Motion for
Judgment as a Matter
of Law
FRCP 50(b)




Summary Judgment
FRCP 56



Motion for New Trial
FRCP 59




May be made at any time before the case is
submitted to the jury (as soon as an
opposing side has been heard on an issue)
Standard: Is there enough evidence that
reasonable jurors could differ?
May be made within 10 days after jury is
discharged
Can only be made if the moving party
brought a Rule 50(a) motion during the trial
and can only assert the same grounds
addressed in the Rule 50(a) motion
May include a joint request for a new trial
under FRCP 59
Grounds: no legally sufficient evidentiary
basis for a reasonable jury to find for the
party opposing the motion
Standard: there enough evidence that
reasonable jurors could differ?
Seeking judgment on a party’s claim or
defense
Will be granted when there remains “no
genuine issue as to any material fact”
Must be filed within 10 days of the entry of
judgment
Should bring both a Rule 50(b) motion and
Rule 59 motion at the same time
Trial judge has broad discretion to
determine whether fairness requires a new
trial for prejudicial errors, misconduct, etc.
Most commonly awarded when the verdict
is excessively large
JOINDER
Supplemental Jx
28 U.S.C. §1367

If П has federal question claim against Δ, П
can join state law theories arising out the
same nucleus of common fact against that Δ
(w/o satisfying diversity reqmts)
7
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules Chart
STAGE
ISSUE
RULE
DESCRIPTION


Compulsory
Counterclaim
FRCP 13(a)

Permissive
Counterclaim
FRCP 13(b)

Crossclaims
FRCP 13(g)


Joinder of Claims
(In General)
FRCP 18

Required Party
FRCP 19(a)

If П has federal question claim against a Δ,
П can join state law theories against other
Δs arising out of same nucleus of facts (w/o
satisfying diversity reqmts)
If any П has diversity claim against a Δ,
other П s w/ same state law claim can join
in the action even though less that $75K is
controversy (still need diversity of
citizenship)
Δ must state as a counterclaim any claim
against the Π that arises out of the same
transaction or occurrence that is the subject
of the complaint.
Δ may state as a counterclaim any other
claim against the Π (but the claim must
have an independent basis for federal
jurisdiction)
A pleading my state as a crossclaim against
a coparty any claim that arises out of the
transaction or occurrence that is the subject
matter of the original action
The crossclaim may include a claim that the
coparty is liable for all or part of the claim
asserted in the action against the
crossclaimant.
A party may join , as independent or
alternative claims, as many claims as it has
against an opposing party.
Party is necessary when:
o (1)(A) The party is necessary for
court to grant complete relief; or
o (1)(B) The party has a legally
protected interest that would be
impaired or impeded or that creates
the risk of inconsistent rulings and
obligations
RELATED CASES/RULES

Makah Indian Tribe v. Verity
8
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules Chart
STAGE
ISSUE
RULE
DESCRIPTION
Required Party –
Joinder Infeasible
FRCP 19(b)


Permissive Party
FRCP 20


Interpleader
FRCP 22


Class Actions
FRCP 23



Intervention of Right
FRCP 24(a)

When joinder of such a necessary party is
not feasible, the court should determine
whether in equity and good conscience the
action should proceed without that party
Factors – (1) Possible prejudice to party or
others; (2) minimizing prejudice by shaping
relief; (3) adequacy of remedy without
party’s presence; (4) adequacy of plaintiff’s
remedy if the action were dismissed
(a) Permissive joinder of other parties as
plaintiffs or defendants allowed where:
o (A) they assert any right to relief or a
right to relief is asserted against them
arising out of the same transactions
or occurrences;
o (B) any common question of law or
fact will arise in the action
(b) The court may issue orders to protect
parties from embarrassment, delay, expense,
or prejudice
Rule interpleader: Available whenever there
exists people with claims that may expose a
Π to double or multiple liability
Statutory interpleader: Interpleader
uthorized by statute
Basic idea: a large number of people (aka
“class”) all find themselves in a similar
legal situation as a result of a transaction or
series of transaction that has created
possible legal liability
Sometimes mandatory
Class members may sometimes opt out of
the class
Court must permit:
o (1) Person had an unconditional
statutory right; or
RELATED CASES/RULES

Alexander v. Fulton County

Grutter v. Bollinger
9
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules Chart
STAGE
ISSUE
RULE
DESCRIPTION
RELATED CASES/RULES
o
(2) Person claims an interest that
may be impaired and no existing
party will adequately represent that
interest
(1) Court may permit:
o (a) Person has a conditional statutory
right; or
o (b) Person has a claim or defense that
shares with the main action a
common question of law or fact
(2) By Government Officer or Agency
Bifurcation
For convenience, to avoid prejudice, or to
expedite and economize, the court may
order a separate trial of one or more
separate issues, claims, etc.
Permissive Intervention
FRCP 24(b)

Separate Trials
FRCP 42(b)



Final Judgment Rule
28 U.S.C. §1291

A losing party may only appeal when there
remains nothing to be done at the trial level
(with some explicit statutory exceptions)
Claim Preclusion
Rest. § 17

Scope of the “Claim”
Rest. § 24(1)

Scope of the “Claim”
Rest. § 24(2)

A valid, final personal judgment is
conclusive between the parties
o If the judgment is for Π → the claim
is extinguished and merged in the
judgment and a new claim may arise
on the judgment
o If the judgment is for Δ → the claim
is extinguished and judgment bars
any subsequent action on the claim
The claim includes all rights related to all or
any part of the transaction or series of
connected transactions out of which the
action arose
“Transaction” and “series” to be determined
pragmatically considering:
APPEALS
JUDGMENTS

Rush v. City of Maple Heights
10
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules Chart
STAGE
ISSUE
RULE
DESCRIPTION
RELATED CASES/RULES
o
Issue Preclusion
(General Rule)
Rest. § 27

Issue Preclusion
Exceptions
Issue Preclusion in
Subsequent Litigation
Rest. § 28

Rest. § 29

Whether the facts are related in time,
space, origin or motivation;
o Whether the facts form a convenient
trial unit; and
o Whether their treatment as a unit
conforms to the parties’ expectations
or business understanding or usage
When an issue of fact or law is actually
litigated and determined by a valid and final
judgment and the determination is essential
to the judgment, the determination is
conclusive in a subsequent action between
the parties, whether on the same or a
different claim
Exceptions to issue preclusion

Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore
Relitigating is also usually precluded in
litigation with others with some exceptions
11