Group items tagged

le 12. Defenses and Objections - When and How Presented - by Pleading or Motion - Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 1. Defendant shall answer within 20 days of service or, if service was waived, within 60 days after request for waiver was sent 2. Every defense shall be asserted in the responsive pleading except that the following defenses may be made by motion: 1. Lack of jurisdiction over subject matter 2. Lack of jurisdiction over person 3. Improper venue 4. Insufficiency of process 5. Insufficiency of service of process 6. Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted 7. Failure to join a party under Rule 19 Ü If (6) is asserted and matters outside the pleading are consider, goes to Rule 56, summary judgment. 3. Judgment on the Pleadings - mainly used by Π when Δ's responsive pleading doesn't dispute Π's claim 7. Consolidation of Defenses in Motion - If a Rule 12 motion is made, any defense or objection is waived unless exception in (h)(2) 8. Waiver or Preservation of Certain Defenses

This is the html version of the file http://students.law.ucdavis.edu/LSA/files/outlines/Civ%20Pro%20-%20Unknown%20-%200203.doc. Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web. CIV PRO OUTLINE As of 5/1 1. WHAT'S CIVIL PROCEDURE? 1. Prescribes and administers process for enforcing rights and duties specified in substantive law 2. EVOLUTION OF CIVIL PROCEDURE (pgs. 18-32) 1. Significant Anglo-Saxon institutions at time of conquest: 1. Crown 2. Local tribunals 1. Slow and uncertain in operation 2. Earliest forms of royal intervention 1. Executive 2. Administrative 3. Writ 1. Written directive from king to royal official/to individual/group of individuals ordering addressees to do/refrain from doing designated act 2. Procedural steps by which prosecuted not uniform 3. Praecipe 1. Executive command made without inquiry 4. Novel disseisin/querela 1. Derived from procedure in which judicial inquest of complaints heard first and then executive action followed 4. king's direct entertainment of complaints of subjects 3. Early evolution of royal courts 1. Medieval central government 1. King's court/curia regis 2. Why separate branches? 1. Administrative necessity for orderly record keeping 2. Historical fact that early Plantagenet kings had domains in France that were more important to them than England and which required their presence on continent for long periods of time (king absent a lot) 4. Common law procedure 1. Background of all medieval litigation was hope of bringing parties to some sort of voluntary accord

"Automobiles, 1 International Harvester Truck, and 235 Night Vision Scopes. Lost, stolen and damaged equipment : 1975 pieces for a total value of $7.5 million."

"The uncontested facts show that Evans cannot satisfy the requirement of "affirmatively prov[ing] prejudice." It is inconceivable to us, and not merely improbable as in Henderson v. Morgan, 426 U.S. 637, 644 n. 12, 96 S.Ct. 2253, 2257 n. 12, 49 L.Ed.2d 108 (1976), that Evans would have gone to trial on a defense of intoxication, or that if he had done so he either would have been acquitted or, if convicted, would nevertheless have been given a shorter sentence than he actually received. It just is not believable that Evans did all the things he does not deny having done, involving elaborate negotiations with the police over several hours, in some sort of alcohol-induced trance. In this respect the present case resembles Morgan v. Israel, 735 F.2d 1033 (7th Cir.1984). In evaluating the voluntariness of Morgan's failure to plead not guilty we said, "It is sufficiently clear that Morgan had no hope at all of an acquittal to enable us to infer that he would not have changed his plea to not guilty .... He admitted having shot Mallason; and when you shoot a person several times, with fatal results, the inference of deliberate homicide is irresistible .... The jury never would have believed that he lacked the ... elementary mental capacity required to form a murderous intent...." Id. at 1036. So here, no jury could have believed that Evans was not acting deliberately when he did all the things he did in the police station. Therefore, being told that if he had not been acting deliberately he would have been acquitted of some of the offenses with which he was charged could not have led him to change his plea and to win acquittal."

Character" for purposes of evidence means a person's propensity to engage or not to engage in certain types of behavior. A person may have a character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, peaceableness or violence, recklessness or care, lawfulness or unlawfulness. The purpose for which character evidence is being offered must be identified to determine it's admissibility. Possible uses:

Character" for purposes of evidence means a person's propensity to engage or not to engage in certain types of behavior. A person may have a character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, peaceableness or violence, recklessness or care, lawfulness or unlawfulness. The purpose for which character evidence is being offered must be identified to determine it's admissibility. Possible uses: