13 February 2008

CA Civ Pro Distinctions (per request)

CA Choice of Law Rules: A federal court sitting in CA must apply CA law, which instead looks to each state’s interest in applying its laws to the case and whether, in a contract action, there is a clause setting forth which state’s laws apply.

Subject Matter Jurisdiction - SMJ in state court is statutory
CA categorizes civil cases as either “limited” (actions involving $25K or less) or unlimited (amount exceeds $25K), and small claims (less than $7500). A case filed in the wrong category may be “re-classified” without the court losing SMJ.

Venue
CA cases: Venue is proper in any county. If the claim could have arisen anywhere, venue is proper where D resides when the action is brought. In a K action, venue is proper where K was agreed to or to be performed, and in a personal injury action, in county where injury occurred.

Pleading
Fed follows NOTICE pleading, while CA follows FACT pleading.


AMENDMENT
*CA allows amendment to correct naming error if new D is a closely related company. CA also allows P to initially name “John Doe” and later replace with the true D if the original complaint is filed on time and includes the charges against the unknown Ds and P does not know the identity of the Does at the time the complaint was filed.


CLASS ACTION

Class Action Fairness Act: Act by Congress that makes it easier for class action to be certified. SMJ exists where
1) citizenship of any class member is different from that of any D;
2) total amount in controversy exceeds $5 million;
3) at least 100 class members; and
4) any D may remove case to federal court.
Act does not apply where D is state, government entity or to claims involving security laws or corporate affairs, or to claims that are entirely local in nature (i.e. where most Ps are citizen of state where action filed and principal injury occurred in state).

Right to a Jury Trial

(CA Constitution’s relation back date is 1850)

FED Civil case must have at least 6 and not more than 12 jurors and at least 6 jurors must reach a unanimous verdict unless parties consent;

CA requires 12 jurors unless parties otherwise consent, and 3/4 of jurors must agree.


Res Judicata – Judgment on the Merits

NOTE: Judgment in CA is not final after until appeal is concluded, while FED decision is final when rendered by court.



Distinctions as suggested by the ALL POWERFUL AND RIGHTEOUS ADACHI!

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

You are a gentleman and a scholar.

Is there a similar list for Evidence?

Holden said...

now posted on main page.

Anonymous said...

Should add primary rights doctrine to joinder and res judicata, and non-party use of collateral estoppel (4 factors - exact same issue, actually litigated, party against whom it is used had opportunity to be heard, and would not be unfair or inequitable to apply collateral estoppel under circumstances).

Also, is CAFA a CA distinction? Doesn't this apply in federal cases?

Thanks for the list. Would be nice if tomorrow's CP essay is just a straight PJ/preclusion one.