Federal Question Jurisdiction and Settlement: Understanding Venue and Economic Models, Slides of Civil procedure

Download Federal Question Jurisdiction and Settlement: Understanding Venue and Economic Models and more Slides Civil procedure in PDF only on Docsity! Agenda for 24th Class • Name plates out • Subject matter jurisdiction – Federal Question Jurisdiction – Settlement • Next Class -- Settlement – Settlement Handout – Writing Assignment (Group 2) • Suit & Settlement Problems • NOT Fee Shifting Problems • New writing assignment policy – If have written 2 pages, can stop and get full credit – Single-spaced, 12 pt font, reasonable margins Docsity.com Last Class – 1391 Ambiguities I • 1391(b)(1) – Def1 is a corporation which is headquartered in SDNY and incorporated in Delaware – Def2 is individual domiciled in New York City (SDNY) – Is venue proper in Delaware? – Literal reading of statute would say “yes,” but not consistent with purpose • 1391(b)(3) – Def1 resides in SDNY; Def2 resides in ED Cal – All events relevant to suit took place in Canada – Is venue proper in EDNY? Is venue proper in ND Cal? – Literal reading of statute would say “yes,” but not consistent with purpose Docsity.com Federal Q J Qs • Summarize Louisville. – Your summary should include the answer to Yeazell. P. 199 Q1 • Under the FRCP as it exists today – If plaintiff had drafted a “well pleaded complaint,” what would have been the key allegations of that complaint? – If plaintiff had drafted a well-pleaded complaint, what paper would defendant have filed in response? What would have been the key elements of that paper? – How would plaintiff have raised the unconstitutionality the Act of Congress which the defendant alleges prohibited giving the passes that the railroad gave the Mottleys? – If defendant’s answer had admitted that it had given passes to the Mottleys, but argued that they were invalid, what motion would the plaintiff have had to make in order to get the Court to grant the Mottleys the relief they requested without discovery or trial? • Yeazell pp. 199ff Qs 2, 3, 4b, • Under 28 USC 1441(a) & (b), if plaintiff had brought the two cases at issue in Yeazell p. 199 Q2 in state court, which of the two cases could defendant remove to federal district court? Docsity.com Settlement I • A settlement is a contract between the plaintiff and the defendant – Usually the defendant promises money or other relief to the plaintiff – The plaintiff promises to drop the case and/or not to bring related cases – Usually involves compromise • Extremely common – Roughly 2/3rds of cases settle – A quarter are resolved by motions to dismiss and summary judgment – Only about 5% go to trial • Usually negotiated by lawyers – Sometimes assisted by judge --- Settlement conference – Sometimes assisted by mediator • Mediation is sometimes required by courts • Mediation is sometimes completely voluntary • Settlement can occur at any time – Before filing of suit; before, during, or after discovery; during trial; while case is on appeal… – Often settlement happens after discovery is complete and after summary judgment Docsity.com Settlement II • Advantages – Saves litigation costs for parties and courts – Reduces uncertainty – Can provide relief that courts cannot or would not order • Apology, continuing business relationship, etc. – Can preserve secrecy/confidentiality • If part of settlement agreement • Disadvantages – No precedent – Usually provides less than full relief – Secrecy means public may never learn about wrongdoing • Judicial policy is to encourage settlement • Buffalo Creek, Part III provides good description of settlement negotiation – Harr, A Civil Action, provides even better description Docsity.com Economic Model of Settlement III • Plaintiff’s estimate of its probability of prevailing may differ from defendant’s estimate of plaintiff’s probability of prevailing – If plaintiff’s estimate is higher, then parties are optimistic relative to each other • e.g. plaintiff thinks it has a 70% of prevailing, but defendant thinks plaintiff has a 40% chance of prevailing – Or plaintiff thinks it has a 30% chance of prevailing, but defendant thinks plaintiff has a 20% chance of prevailing – If plaintiff’s estimate is lower, then parties are pessimistic relative to each other • If plaintiff’s minimum acceptable offer is higher than defendant’s maximum offer, then settlement is impossible • If plaintiff’s minimum acceptable offer is lower than defendant’s maximum offer, then settlement is possible – But still might not happen, if parties engage in strategic behavior and fail to reach agreement an exact settlement amount Docsity.com Economic Model of Settlement IV • Factors encouraging settlement – Mutual pessimism – High litigation costs – Risk aversion – All lower plaintiff’s minimum acceptable offer and increases defendants maximum offer • Factor discouraging settlement – Mutual optimism Docsity.com