CIVIL PROCEDURE Fall 2002SECTIONS A & G: CLASS 5

Columbus School of Law

The Catholic University of America

Professor Fischer

September 6, 2002

WHAT WILL WE LEARN TODAY?

• 1. Introduction to a case we will follow in this course: CARPENTER v. DEE;

• 2. We will learn how litigators think when a case is first presented to them, through a simulation of a strategy meeting between a senior partner and an associate in a law firm;

ON CALL LIST

• Monday Sept 9 Kush Arora, James Galvin

• Wednesday Sept 11 Emily Ing, Jody Rosen

• Friday Sept 13 Billy Lynch, Jennifer Langlois

WRAP-UP OF LAST CLASS

• It’s important to read cases carefully and actively.

• Briefing is a TOOL, used to analyze cases.

• All law students develop their own personal style of briefing cases but all briefs should contain certain information (on next slide).

WRAP-UP CONTINUED

• All briefs should contain the case name; court; date of decision; procedural history; arguments on behalf of the parties; key facts; holding; policy considerations; effect of decision.

• It is often helpful to note your personal reaction to the cases you read.

Duval County: The Litigation Continues

• The Duval County school desegregation litigation is still ongoing, after more than 40 years

• In 1999, a federal district judge ruled that the district was unitary

• Jacksonville branch of NAACP appealed this ruling

• In March, 2001, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit heard argument

Carpenter v. Dee: Choosing a Cause of Action

• You are an associate in a Boston law firm called Needham, Shaker and Coblentz

• The senior partner, Carol Coblentz, sends you her initial memorandum (CB 1033)

• After you read the memo, Carol calls you into her office for a strategy meeting on (a) the causes of action that may be available to Nancy Carpenter and (b) who are possible defendants, if the firm chooses to represent Ms. Carpenter

Key Facts

• What are the key facts in the memo?

Some Key Facts• In 1985 Charlie Carpenter (25) was killed in a car

accident. • Jeep overturned. Driven by Randall Dee• Modifications to jeep• CC survived by pregnant wife • Dee conveyed half-interest in a home to brother Peter (?)• Jeep owned by girlfriend Twyla Burrell.• Insurance on jeep was statutory minimum ($10,0000)• Dee stopped by Lowell police on several occasions• Dee convicted on 4 counts in criminal court

QUESTION ONE

• WHO SHOULD BE THE PLAINTIFF(S)?

• CONCEPTS: REAL PARTY IN INTEREST, CAPACITY (see FRCP Rule 17)

QUESTION TWO

• WHO IS/ARE THE POSSIBLE DEFENDANT(S) AND WHAT IS/ARE THE CAUSE(S) OF ACTION AGAINST EACH DEFENDANT?

QUESTION THREE

• WHAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION DO WE NEED?

QUESTION FOUR

• HOW WILL WE GET THIS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION?

QUESTION FIVE

• WHAT REMEDIES ARE AVAILABLE?

QUESTION SIX

• SHOULD WE TAKE THIS CASE?