The litigation process, constitutional environment and jurisdiction,
joinder. Those were the three main areas we covered.
He's going to send a new case that updates Asahi.
Personal jurisdiction, in rem jurisdiction, specific jurisdiction
(how much contact with a state is enough for a given case),
general jurisdiction (amount of contact needed to be sued
generally).
Notice, venue, discretionary refusal of jurisdiction (e.g.,
forum non conveniens)
Joinder of claims, joinder of parties, intervention,
interpleader (rule and statutory)
Class actions
Code of professional responsibility, courtesy and decorum for the
circuit court of Dane County (various courts have guidance
for lawyers practicing there)
These aren't rules that you litigate with (i.e., motions
for sanction for violation, etc.).
You can be an agressive litigator without being a jerk.
Virtually every court has these, and they're not very
surprising.
Three important lessons from law school:
Court never starts on time;
Never be late for court
If you are late, court starts on time
§ 807.01(4): this is the offer of settlement thing: double
costs if a settlement is rejected and you greater than or
equal to that amount in a judgment. [would this apply in
a diversity case in federal court? prior exam question, and
an oral exercise this semester]
§ 807.05: no agreement or stipulation is binding unless
it's made in court or it's in writing and signed. So get
that stuff signed!
§ 895.055. Predecessor was § 814.025. This is sort
of a Rule 11 kind of thing: sanctions. The old § 802.05
was like Rule 11. Then Rule 11 got its safe-harbor procedure
(must serve the motion 21 days before filing it). And
WI started contemplating softening things: safe harbor, and
discretionary sanctions, and a statement that the purpose
was not necessarily to make the injured party whole-- that's
just a factor to consider. And WI SC repeals §§
802.05 and 814.025. But one of those was a legislatively-made
rule, not a court-made one (§ 802.05), and there was
protest. But they did it, saying that this was a court
management rule. So now we've got § 895.044-- it is
brand new. Sort of a soft safe-harbor proceeding (the
court may take corrections into account). How does this
apply in a diversity action (is it a substantive right, because
it specifies damages?).
7 December
10 or so waiver/no-waiver; 25 or so yes-no; 25 short answers
(don't write more than 3 sentences); litigation strategy
problem (facts will be sent to us prior to the exam;
use headings); a couple short essay (3-5 para. maybe
an Eerie problem, maybe a class action thing). 4 hours.
Have rule book, including statutes.
Study Poper Aircraft v. Reno for litigation strategy.
List possible defenses; make a list of procedural moves you
might make as a defendant. That will be helpful.