Counterclaims Analysis

Original Claim

Counterclaim

CC against
13(h) X=Co-
of

Original Claim

Impleader

3P

/3P
Counterclaim

13(a)(1)(A) Does the claim arise out of

the T or O that is Subject matter of
opposing pty's claim?

YES-13(a)(1)(B)- Does Just

adjudication of CC req. the
presence of add'l pty's of who ct.
cannot get PJD?

NO- Does claim independently

meet SMJ requirements

NO- Is original claim

against D in rem or quasi
in rem 13(a)(2)(B)

YES- Claim is
~compulsory. D wont be
precluded from bringing
later

Yes- Claim isnt

compulsory. it may
be asserted as
permissive. wont
be lost if ~asserted
not

No- Claim isnt

compulsory. can be
brought in future suit
but not now b/c of
SMJ problem. Must
independently satisfy
SMJ

NO- Claim is
compulsory. if
~asserted it will be
barred/precluded
from future action- res
judicata

Preliminary Questions
Is there SMJ?
FQ or DIV?

Is there PJD over

each

Was each
adequately served?

Does the Dist.

satisfy venue?

Did receive notice

& opp. To be heard?
12

! The answer to all questions must be yes for the action to proceed

Or did D
consent by K,
stat, or waiver to
PJD?

YES: Ct. can state

PJD over D BUT Still
must consider
Service of Process

NO: Was D
physically served
while he was
personally in the
state?

NO: Ct. Cant

assert PJD over D

Was D
domiciled in
forum state @
time of service?

No: Was D a
resident of
forum @ time of
service? OR
continuous,
systematic,
substantial
contacts?

YES: Ct. can

probably assert
PJD over D check
Service

Check
applicability of LA stat & correct
Service OP

NO: Ct.
Cant assert
PJD over D

NO: Did D conduct

continuous,
systematic, or
substantial contacts
w/ forum?

1. Does the s claim

relate to or arise out of
Ds voluntary contacts
with the forum state?
2. Are Ds contacts
sucient that D should
reasonably expect to
litigate in forum?

YES: Ct. has

PJD over D

D is an
individual

NO: then
what species
is D? Lol
YES: Ct
can assert
PJD over
D

YES: is D
incorporated
in forum
state?

YES: Case may

qualify for
Specific JDisolated, sporadic
contacts

NO: Case will need

General JD or it
cannot proceed @
all

2. Service Of Process
D is a
corpora
tion

NO: Does D
have its PPB
in forum
state
NO: the Ct. ~hear
case even though
there is PJD

YES: the Ct. can

hear case & render
binding judgment
against D binding
all his assets

Does L-A
Stat
provide for
JD over D?

YES: was D
Properly served
pursuant to LA
stat?

Individual:
Minimum
contacts w/
forum sucient

Are at least some of

Ds significant
contacts w/ forum
voluntary on Ds
part?

NO: D lacks
minimum contacts
w/ forum so state
~SPJD over D- still
look to general JD

YES: D has minimum

contacts w/ Forum &
JD ~violate Ds Due
process rights BUT still
must consider Service
of Process:

ERIE: Div. Cases

YES: Ignore Erie

Fed Stat.
on point?

Fed. R. on
Point?

YES: can we
follow FR. &
State policy
@same time?

Fed. Policy/
Practice that
conflicts w/
state policy
Determine if
procedural or
Substantive:

Will applying R. =
inequitable admin.
of laws? sub. di. in
litigation if fed. R.
applied?

YES: Follow
Both
1. Does it
really
regulate
practice or
procedure?
NO: Hanna
Pt. 2 is R.
valid under
REA

2. Does it
abridge,
enlarge, or
modify a
substantive
right?

R. Not likely to
be held
unconstitutional
Apply fed. R.

1. Hanna Pt. 1
Will applying R.
encourage forum
shopping? sub. di.
betw. S. & F. law may
lead to FS

2. Byrd balancing
Does F. R. involve essential
characteristic of F. ct. system?
balance:

Relationship betw. state proc. R. &

substantive S. right. If S. Right
bound up w/ S. right= Favors S. R.
Interests of F. Jud. System. If
applying S. R. would alter/disrupt
essential characteristic of F. Jud.
System (i.e. trial function: Judge,
jury, app. ct)= Favors F.R
Likelihood of Outcome determinationOutcome significantly di. if F. R.
used= Favors S. R.