1 / 23

Civil Procedure Feb. 11

Civil Procedure Feb. 11. Rule 14. Exam Announcement. You will get a take home exam – completely open book (you just can’t collaborate with anyone). The exam will be posted on the course website and sent via email at 9 am on Friday, May 2. It will be due NO LATER than noon on Monday May 5.

zahir-best
Télécharger la présentation

Civil Procedure Feb. 11

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Civil Procedure Feb. 11 Rule 14

  2. Exam Announcement • You will get a take home exam – completely open book (you just can’t collaborate with anyone). The exam will be posted on the course website and sent via email at 9 am on Friday, May 2. It will be due NO LATER than noon on Monday May 5. • WORD TO THE WISE: You should plan on having completed your outline and studied the material before Friday, May 2 – you cannot learn the material as you write the exam answer or you will be setting yourself up to do very poorly.

  3. Defining the terms • Impleader under R 14 is based on the substantive law principles of indemnity or subrogation (usually contract law issues)& derivative liability (tort law) • Indemnity and/or subrogation - deals with a contractual or equitable right under either via K or via statutory or common law one party has the duty to reimburse another. Derivative liability looks to substantive law (usually tort law - may be statutory or common law). (Look to an actual contract or to the applicable state law to see if there is indemnity, subrogation or derivative liability)

  4. Indemnity example • My general contractor has a contract with all the subcontractors – they agree to indemnify her. I sue the general contractor because a pipe bursts in my house. The contractor wins the suit (there was nothing wrong with the pipe or construction). Does the indemnity contract come into play in that scenario? What if the general contractor loses and there is a judgment against her for the damages. Does the indemnity contract come into play in that scenario?

  5. Price v. CTB (p. 748) • Identify the plaintiff & defendant in the original suit and the basis of the lawsuit; what are the plaintiffs’ claims? • ITW manufactured the nails. Why does Latco want to bring them in to the suit?

  6. Court’s (good) summary of R. 14 • A def may assert a claim against ANYONE NOT A PARTY to the original action if that third party’s liability is in some way dependent upon the outcome of the original action.

  7. Price cont’d – the tactical ?s • Could Latco argue that it was ITW’s fault if ITW was not a party to the lawsuit? Assuming ITW will vigorously defend itself, what’s the reason to want to join them?

  8. Rule 14(a) - Price • Could Latco implead ITW if Latco’s theory was – it’s ITW’s fault, not ours? • What’s the general rule on impleader • What’s policy underlying this rule

  9. The basis for impleader – Price cont’d • Did ITW have a contract in which it agreed to indemnify Latco? • Does AL allow for contribution amongst joint tortfeasors? • What’s the theory for impleader here?

  10. Price cont’d • What about ITW’s argument that it may not be at fault – does that impact the Rule 14 analysis? • If Latco wins, what happens to its claim against ITW?If Latco loses, does that mean that Latco automatically collects from ITW? If not, what has to happen?

  11. Twists on Price (read the rule to answer these!!) • Can ITW include, as part of its defense, that the chicken house fell apart because plaintiff failed to maintain it and plaintiff also assumed the risk? Why/why not? • Can ITW assert a defense that Latco assumed the risk when it bought the nails? • Assume the plaintiff had a contract with ITW to pay it directly for supplies used in making the chicken house. The plaintiff breached that K and didn’t pay. Could ITW, once it was impleaded, sue the plaintiff for the breach of contract?

  12. More twists on Price • Once Latco has impleaded ITW, can plaintiff, under R. 14, amend and a claim against ITW? Even if R. 14 allows plaintiff to assert a claim, is there any other issue the plaintiff must deal with before amending and adding a claim v. ITW?

  13. Discretionary call for R. 14 • Party must get leave to implead someone & court has discretion – what factors does court consider in determining whether to allow impleader (see p. 752)

  14. Putting it to the test – hypos p. 752-753 • A sues B for assault; B seeks to implead C contending A got the wrong guy – it was C, not B, that hit A. Is this proper impleader?

  15. P753 #b • Price sues Latco; Latco impleads Nails (on grounds its products were defective). 6 months later, Nails wants to implead Steel Co – the manufacturer of the metal on the ground the metal was impure. Can Nails use R. 14 to implead Steel for contribution? Is there any argument not to allow the impleader?

  16. #c • Price v. Latco; Latco counterclaims for unpaid bills. In response to L’s counter-claim, Price seeks to implead Bank, which Price alleges, failed to fund the line of credit as it had agreed. Can Price do this?

  17. CB Review Problems • P v. Auto Dealer and Auto Manuf. P alleges she was injured in a wreck caused by a defect in the steering mechanism. • Dealer wants to allege that Manuf is contractually obligated to indemnify Dealer for any liability that Dealer may have to P. What pleading, if any, should Dealer file?

  18. More review probs Manuf wants to assert that D fraudulently told manuf that it was repairing the defective steering wheel and manuf relied upon this representation. What pleading, if any, would manufacturer file. If manufacturer filed that pleading, could it include claims for unpaid bills for vehicles unrelated to the one involved in the wreck? (see note 3c p. 754)

  19. Owen Equip v. Kroger • P (Mrs. Kroger - Iowa) = administratrix of estate of husband sues the Omaha power company when a crane touches a power line and electrocutes her husband. Omaha Power (Neb) impleads Owen Equip (Neb??); (QUERY – why can they do this - no diversity here). • P (Iowa) v. Omaha Power (Neb) • v • Owen Equip (Neb)

  20. P amends and sues Owen Equip herself; Omaha is dismissed on a sum judgment motion; case continues and 2 years into litigation (p. v. Owen Equip) Owen equip moves to dismiss for lack of smj b/c it’s POB is in Iowa. • P v. Om. Pwr (Neb) & Owen Equip(Neb)* • v. • Owen Equip (Neb)* • * (TURNS OUT OWEN Equip = citiz of Iowa)

  21. Owen Equip cont’d • What’s the issue the Supreme Court is deciding? • How does it decide this issue? • What’s the reasoning? • Is this a fair result? Is it the right result?

  22. 1367 • 1367 codifies Owen Equip • Note that 1367 in diversity cases has different rules for defendants than for plaintiffs- why? (Why can a defendant get supplemental jurisdiction for Rule 14(a) but the plaintiff, if it wants to file a claim against the impleaded party, must have a basis for orig’l jurisdiction) • Why doesn’t it have different rules for plaintiffs/defendants in federal question cases?

  23. Reflective exercises • Questions arising from reflective exercises on R. 20 problem?

More Related