ITT Ask Cabra Your Civ Pro Questions

[Cabra]

i'm a little confused. why would states pass long arm statutes to limit the constitutional scope of their jurisdiction instead of doing what california does and let the state court have the total scope of personal jurisdiction under the due process clause? isn't that basically limiting the amoutn of power they have? 

force of habit?

I'm boggled by it too.

[jellybean00]

is it possible for me to go through glannon all of tonight? it's literally still in amazon.com-plastic-wrap and it looks pretty fat to me but i'm hoping a lot of the "examples" fill up the space...

[Cabra]

is it possible for me to go through glannon all of tonight? it's literally still in amazon.com-plastic-wrap and it looks pretty fat to me but i'm hoping a lot of the "examples" fill up the space...

the examples and explanations are most of it. I bet you could read the whole thing (without erie or class actions!) pretty quick.

[Cabra]

cabra, are you still in that ltr?

boo at abbreviations!

if you mean "long term relationship"--yes I am.

[jellybean00]

is that "sad" out of pity or crushed hope?

why do i feel like every other cls'er i meet is in an ltr, engaged or married???

[jellybean00]

also, am i doing myself a disservice by skipping over all these examples at the end of each chapter? should i make sure to look over them at least once before my exam?

[,.,.,.;.,.,.]

is that "sad" out of pity or crushed hope?

why do i feel like every other cls'er i meet is in an ltr, engaged or married???

people who go to columbia are people who had their poo figured out at age 11.

Huh?

[Cabra]

is that "sad" out of pity or crushed hope?

why do i feel like every other cls'er i meet is in an ltr, engaged or married???

I've noticed this too...I didn't think so many of us would be paired up.

also, am i doing myself a disservice by skipping over all these examples at the end of each chapter? should i make sure to look over them at least once before my exam?

umm. The examples are long and repetitive. If you want to test yourself with some practice questions, go get the Glannon Guide and the book store first thing tomorrow and/or print some of Prof. Goldberg's civ pro exams from the G drive...

[crow]

also, am i doing myself a disservice by skipping over all these examples at the end of each chapter? should i make sure to look over them at least once before my exam?

I found the examples pretty helpful, just for clarifying some things about the rules I wouldn't have thought of.  You might be able to get that benefit but save some time by skipping the examples but skimming just the explanations, with an eye for definitive statements (i.e. "this example makes a single important point, that a defendant is not forced to implead a third party under Rule 14, even if the third party may be liable to reimburse the defendant for all or part of the plaintiff's claim" or "Rule 33(a) ... does not authorize sending interrogatories to non-party witnesses").

[crow]

Is there a situation in which a party could elect to move for either SJ or JML (where they can choose between the two)?  (in other words, might there be an overlap in timing for when SJ and JML are available to a party?)

Can a judge enter JML sua sponte?  How about renewed JML?

I don't think so.  SJ is pre-trial, and a party can move for JML after the other party has made their case.

I don't think that a judge can move for JML sua sponte, or renewed JML sua sponte, but let me check Rule 50 quickly.  Cabra: I'm also cramming for CivPro.

Rule 50(a) doesn't seem to contemplate whether it has to be on a party's motion either way.  My prof seemed to indicate that sua sponte is acceptable for JML, but went on some other tangent so didn't go into why, or what cases there are to support that.  So I was hoping someone else had looked into it or that it had been brought up in someone else's class.    thanks anyway.