Examination No.
CIVIL PROCEDURE I, Section 1 (815-01) Professor Harding
December 11, 1992 Room 213
FINAL EXAMINATION
INSTRUCTIONS - READ CAREFULLY
1. This is a closed-book examination. You are only allowed
to use your Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("Rules Book").
Your Rules Book must not contain any tabs, annotations, outlines,
or other written material. You may, however, have underlined or
hiqhlighted words or passages. If this rule is violated, you
will not be permitted to finish the final examination and will
receive an "E" for the course.
2. You may not use commercial or personal course outlines.
Violation of this rule subjects you to the sanction mentioned
above in Rule 1.
3. You have three (3) hours to complete the examination. The
final examination is worth a total of six hundred and fifty (650)
points.
4. The final examination has three questions. The first
question is worth two hundred (200) points. The second question
is worth three hundred (300) points. The third, and final,
question is worth one hundred and fifty (150) points.
5. You must write your examination number on the front of the
examination sheet and on the front of each blue book that you
use.
6. If you use more than one blue book, mark the first blue book
"1 of 3", the second one "2 of 3", and so on.
7. Write only in pen.
8. Write all of your answers in your blue books. Please write
on every other line of each page.
9. Please write only on one side of the page.
YOU MAY TURN THE PAGE TO CONTINUE READING THE INSTRUCTIONS.
10. Write your answers clearly and thoughtfully. If you believe
you need to make an assumption, then clearly note what it is you
are assuming. If you make a reasonable factual inference from a
given fact, clearly state the inferred fact and how you
reasonably inferred the fact.
11. Answer only the question(s) asked. You will not receive
points for irrelevant responses.
12. I will periodically write the time remaining on the
blackboard. In addition, I will verbally advise you when there
are fifteen (15) minutes remaining and when there are five (5)
minutes remaining.
13. After three hours have passed, I will call time and all
students must stop writing. Please place your pen on top of your
blue books so that I can verify that everyone has stopped
writing. If you do not follow this instruction, I will
confiscate your blue book(s) and you will receive an "E" for the
course.
14. I will be in the classroom during the examination. If you
have any questions, please come and ask me.
15. After you hand in your blue books do not ask me any
questions regarding the final exam.
GOOD LUCK!
DO NOT TURN THIS PAGE OR BEGIN THE EXAMINATION UNTIL
YOU ARE TOLD TO BEGIN
Facts
Ms. Miller recently had an automobile accident. The
accident occurred on a freeway in the State of Midas. Her car
was hit by a truck owned and operated by the Shelby Moving and
Storage Company("Shelby"). Ms. Miller sustained severe injuries
and her car was demolished.
Shelby Moving and Storage Company is incorporated in
Delaware and in California. It is a national moving company so it
does a significant amount of interstate travel. Shelby has three
main operational facilities where the shipping orders are taken
and from where the drivers obtain their assignments. These
centers are located in Midas, Kentucky, and Arizona. Each
facility has a General Manager responsible for Shelby's day-to-
day business operations. These managers meet with Shelby's
executives bi-annually to participate in a business planning
strategy. Most of the trucks are kept at one of the three main
facilities. Although, in some cases, a particularly busy driver
might keep his or her truck with them.
The facility in Midas has a few more employees than the
other facilities because all repairs and maintenance of the
trucks and other equipment are done there. The Midas facility
also has the largest boardroom so if the executives and managers
need to meet they frequently, but not always, go to the facility
located in Midas.
The chief executives tend to rely upon the managers at the
plant facilities for much of the daily decision making. However,
long-term strategic business policy is made at the bi-annual
meetings that the executives and managers attend. As previously
noted, these meetings are frequently, but not always, held at the
Midas facility. Sometimes these meetings are held at Shelby's
New York office. The Shelby executives decided to maintain a New
York office for business purposes as it helps convey their
national reputation. The New York office has a receptionist and
maintains files on various different shipping and moving
contracts.
Ms. Miller comes to you for legal advice. She wants to sue
Shelby for her injuries and the damage to her car. She would
prefer to bring the action in the state of Midas because it
is more convenient for her.
The state of Midas has a long-arm statute that reads as
follows: "The state of Midas can exercise personal jurisdiction
up to the limits allowed by the United States Constitution".
Therefore, the first task you must address is whether Shelby
can be forced to defend the action in the state of Midas. You
should also explore other possible locales for an action. Assume
that these forums have long-arm statutes that are identical to
Midas'.
OUESTION TWO
This question is worth a maximum of three hundred (300) points.
Be sure to allocate your time properly and to be thorough in your
identification and analysis of the issues.
Reread the facts in Question One.
ADDITIONAL FACTS
Ms. Miller lives and works in Midas. She has lived there for
approximately 12 years. Although, she has recently been offered a
promotion by her employer that would require her to move to
California. She is seriously considering this employment
opportunity because living in California appeals to her and the
new job would be challenging. Ms. Miller is originally from
Arizona. She was born there and attended elementary school
through high school in Scottsdale, Arizona. Her family (parents
and siblings) still reside there. While she has enjoyed living
in Midas, she has never contemplated remaining in Midas for the
rest of her life. This is another reason why the job offer in
California is so attractive.
Ms. Miller's car that was demolished was a 1990 Mitsubishi
Eclipse and the book value was about $20,000. To date, the cost
of her personal injuries are approximately $25,000. However,
because of a problem with one of the ligaments in her right knee,
the doctors are unsure as to whether additional future medical
bills will be incurred and if so, the amount of the medical
bills.
Shelby does business nationally. However, its three main
facilities are located in Midas, Kentucky, and Arizona. All
maintenance of the trucks is done at the Midas facility. In
addition, all new drivers must take a two week course on long-
distance driving skills which is held at the Midas facility.
Shelby also requires that each of its drivers take a "refresher"
course every two years. These seminars are usually held at the
Midas facility, but occasionally they are held at the Arizona and
Kentucky facilities.
Your next task is to decide in which forum Ms. Miller can
bring her action. Like many potential litigants, she has a
preference for bringing her action in federal court.
Once you decide where the action should be heard you will
need to address the issue of determining which state's law to
apply.
QUESTION THREE
Directions: Carefully read each question. From the six
questions presented, select only three to answer.
Your answer to each question should be well
organized and reflect your understanding of the
legal and policy issues involved. The response to
each of the three questions you select is worth a
maximum of fifty (50) points. The total points
possible on this question is one hundred and fifty
(150) points.
1. How do Pennoyer, International Shoe, and
Shaffer interact? Based upon this interaction
what is the status of the transient personal
jurisdiction rule suggested in Burnham's
plurality opinion? Do you agree or disagree
with your conclusion? Explain why.
2. Reconcile the Finley approach and the Ferens
approach? Which approach do you endorse
and why?
3. Should the transfer of venue statute be
changed? If so, why and what suggestions
would you make to alter the rule?
4. Is there a risk that a federal court sitting
in diversity confronted with a situation
requiring the determination of the
substantive law of the state on a particular
issue when the state's highest court has not
ruled on the issue is moving close to
offending Erie and retreating back to the
Swift v. Tyson days? Or, does Erie permit
this action?
5. How would you describe and assess the
interplay between Rule ll's "policing
function" and its possible potential to
create a "chilling effect" on litigation?
6. Pick a topic that you are interested in
discussing and analyzing. Be sure to present
your question first so I know to what you are
responding.