CIVIL PROCEDURE CLASS 28
Professor Fischer
Columbus School of Law
The Catholic University of America
November 29, 2001
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Another review class will be held on
Wednesday, December 5 at the usual
class meeting time (6:20 to 8:10) in
Room 211.
WRAP-UP OF LAST CLASS
We finished our study of personal jurisdiction
by discussing a case applying International
Shoe’s minimum contacts test, World Wide
Volkswagen v. Woodson (1980)
WHAT WILL WE DO TODAY?
Learn about the venue requirement and the
the federal venue statute
Learn about the common law doctrine of
forum non conveniens
Learn about the transfer provisions in 28
U.S.C. 1404 and 1406.
Hear oral argument on Practice Exercise 31
Time permitting, do some review problems.
Venue
What is venue and why is it required?
VENUE REQUIREMENTS ARE
PURELY STATUTORY
What is the general federal venue
statute?
VENUE IN FEDERAL
DIVERSITY ACTIONS
Under 28 U.S.C. §1391, where can
venue lie in a federal diversity action
where the defendant(s) is/are natural
person(s)?
MEANING OF RESIDENCE
Should “residence” for venue purposes
be equated with domicile or citizenship
for diversity purposes?
Compare ex parte Shaw, 145 U.S. 444,
447 (892) (dictum) with convenience
rationale for venue
VENUE IN FEDERAL
QUESTION ACTIONS
Under 28 U.S.C. §1391, where can
venue lie in a federal question action
where the defendant(s)s is/are natural
person(s)?
How do the venue rules for federal
question actions differ from diversity
actions?
VENUE FOR CORPORATIONS
Where does venue lie if a defendant is a
corporation?
What if the state, like Virginia or New
York, but unlike Maryland, has more
than one judicial district?
VENUE FOR ALIENS
Where does venue lie for alien
defendants?
FORUM SELECTION CLAUSES
Parties may select a venue that is not a
statutory venue by including a forum
selection clause in a contract.
In Bremen v. Zapata, 407 U.S. 1, 15 (1972),
Supreme Court held that federal courts sitting
in admiralty should enforce such clauses
absent showing that doing so “would be
unreasonable or unjust, or that the clause
was invalid for such reasons as fraud or
overreaching”
Non-negotiable forum selection clauses have
been enforced by the Supreme Court.
PIPER AIRCRAFT CO. V.
REYNO (1981)
Landmark decision
Who is the plaintiff?
Who is plaintiff
suing?
What is the cause of
action?
Where does plaintiff
bring the action?
Why does plaintiff
choose that forum?
Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno
Wrongful death suit originally brought in
Superior Court of California by Gaynell Reyno
on behalf of 5 Scottish passengers
Defendants were Piper Aircraft Co. (aircraft
mfr) (PA) and Hartzell Propeller Inc. (OH)
(propeller mfr)
DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS
Explain the strategies and procedural
moves of defendants Piper and Hartzell.
How did the case get from the state
court in CA (where filed) to the federal
court in PA?
FORUM NON CONVENIENS
What is forum non conveniens?
FNC: For transfer to Foreign Forum or
between state judicial systems
28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) permits court to
dismiss if venue has improperly been
laid “or if it be in the interest of justice,
transfer [the] case to any district or
division in which it could have been
brought”
IN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT
How does the
majority rule in the
U.S. Supreme Court?
Describe Justice
Marshall’s reasoning
in his majority
opinion.
SIGNIFICANCE OF PIPER v.
REYNO
This case extends to doctrine of forum non
conveniens for use in an international context
by adopting a lower threshold and by
decreasing its deference to foreign plaintiffs
choice of forum (takes nationality into
consideration)
The foundation for any modern forum non
conveniens analysis in an international
context.
Decision has prompted continuing criticism
Scottish Legal System
See student webpage on my Spring
2001 Comparative Law site:
http://law.cua.edu/classes/comparative
_law/grant/
See also Kevin F. Crombie’s useful site:
http://www.scottishlaw.org.uk/
PIPER Test
In applying the doctrine of forum non
conveniens to a foreign plaintiff, Supreme
Court essentially follows two steps it had
articulated in Gilbert.
1. Requires a suitable forum in another
country
2. Considers 4 factors or interests to
determine which forum would best serve
private and public interests
Unfavorable choice of law alone should not
bar dismissal
LORD DENNING
Famous and longlived English judge
“As a moth is drawn
to the light, so is a
litigant drawn to the
United States.”
Attractions of U.S. Legal System For Foreign
Plaintiffs
Encouragement by U.S. plaintiffs’ bar
for litigants to bring suit in U.S.
contingency fee arrangements
extensive pre-trial discovery
advantageous substantive law
availability of trial by jury
tendency for large jury awards
PRACTICE EXERCISE 31
CB p. 829
Oral argument on motion to dismiss for
lack of subject matter jurisdiction by
McGill’s Garage and Dale McGill
EXAM TIPS
Read questions carefully and remember
to answer the question asked
Use IRAC form for each issue in
question
Answer every question; manage your
time carefully
Get sufficient sleep the night before the
exam.
FOR REVIEW CLASS - VERYCLEAN HYPO
CB p. 834
Please prepare to discuss this
hypothetical at the December 5 review
class.