Civil Procedure

Government contractors, immune from state liability, federal law preempts state law, federal common law, preemption.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a) permits joinder of plaintiffs if all claims arose out of the same transaction or occurrence and share common questions of law or fact, permissive joinder.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a), automatically disclose all documents and tangible evidence on which it intends to rely at trial, dislosure, motion to compel discovery, protective order.

A contract may form the basis of a discovery obligation under the federal rules of civil procedure, interrogatory.

Rule 56(f), timely respond to a motion for summary judgment, sanctions.

Time-barred, longer statutory period, claim-preclusive effect of a judgment on the merits in a federal diversity action, claim preclusion, res judicata, statute of limitations.

Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co.; exercise general jursidiction gives court authority to hear all claims at place of defendant's domicile or place of service, without showing connection between specific claims and forum state.

Szendry-Ramos v. First Bancorp; no supplemental jurisdiction (formerly ancillary jurisdiction or pendent jurisdiction) if plaintiff's state law claims substantially predominate over the federal claims or raise complex or novel issues of state law.

Silvestri v. General Motors Corp.; sanctionable spoliation is destruction or material alteration of evidence or failure to preserve property for another's use as evidence in pending or reasonably foreseeable litigation; manufacturer opportunity to inspect.

Harnden v. Jayco, Inc.; summary judgment testimony usually form of an affidavit or sworn statement even if a court's consideration of inadmissible evidence is in error, such error is harmless it if does not affect any party's substantial rights.

United Oil Co. v. Parts Associates, Inc.; may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, relevant to claim or defense; other lawsuits regarding similar products relevant to a defendant's failure to warn; indemnify; indemnity agreement.

Pebble Beach Co. v. Caddy; Due process is satisfied when the defendant has performed some act or consummated some transaction within the forum or has otherwise purposefully availed himself of the privileges of conducting business in the forum.

Roell v. Withrow; When a party has signaled consent to the magistrate judge's authority to hear a case through actions rather than words, there is little value in strict insistence on an express consent requirement.

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Koenig; Just as questions from the bench can provide insight that helps lawyers make a stronger case, so too can questions from the jury help lawyers tailor their presentations; motion in limine.

Will v. Hallock; Collateral order requirements (1) conclusively determine the disputed question, (2) resolve an important issue completely separate from the merits of the action, and (3) be effectively unreviewable on appeal; collateral order doctrine.

Goodman v. Praxair, Inc; Under Federal Rule of Procedure 15(c), an amendment that changes the party against whom a claim is asserted relates back to the date of the original pleading under certain limited conditions such as related companies.

Owen Equipment and Erection Company v. Kroger; plaintiff in diversity case cannot rely on ancillary jurisdiction to permit amendment to complaint to bring claim against non-diverse third-party defendant; complete diversity; diversity jurisdiction.

Nystrom v. TREX, Inc; Interlocutory appeals are within court's discretion, and will be granted only when court certifies that each ruling presented for appeal involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial difference of opinion.

Podhorn v. Paragon Group, Inc; A defendant's claims against a plaintiff must be asserted as a counterclaim if arise out of the transaction or occurrence and do not require the presence of third parties over whom the court lacks jurisdiction.

Quinby v. WestLB AG; A court may shift the cost of restoring and searching for relevant information in an electronic form when the party who converts the data into an inaccessible format should have reasonably anticipated a need to produce that data.

Ochoa v. PV Holding Corp; When determining a party's domicile, the controlling factors are the party's actual place of residence and the real intention of remaining there as disclosed by the party's entire course of conduct.

Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor; Settlement is relevant to the certification of a class; however, the class unity requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 remain the dominant concern.

Brown v. Plata; expand interpretation; judicial system takes an active role in the state prison system.

Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A., v. Brown et ux.; sporadic, unrelated contacts are not enough for general jurisdiction.

Krupski v. Costa Crociere S.P.A; amend pleading; relation back hinges on the knowledge of the party to be added, not the party seeking amendment.

Shady Grove Orthopedic Assoc. v. Allstate Ins. Co.; diversity case; federal procedure that does not alter the rules for deciding a claim will control.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes; Walmart sex discrimination; class actions require a common claim that can be resolved with one determination.

Hertz Corporation v. Friend; Diversity Jurisdiction; a corporation's nerve center is its principal place of business for purposes of diversity jurisdiction.

Shady Grove Orthopedic Association v. Allstate Insurance Co.; Rule 23 Class Action; Federal procedure that does not alter the rules for deciding a claim will control in diversity cases.

Community Trust Bancorp, Inc. v. Community Trust Financial Corp.; online services; continuous interaction with forum state supports jurisdiction.

Gunn v. Minton; legal malpractice cases do not arise under federal law even when the underlying case involved a controversy over the application of federal law.

AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion; Federal Arbitration Act will preempt state laws on the unconscionability of contracts if those laws single out arbitration and make private agreements to arbitrate unenforceable.

Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co.; Appearance of risk of actual judicial bias may require a judge to recuse himself from consideration of a particular case.