William Mitchell College of Law

Civil Procedure Examination

Prof. Eric S. Janus

Spring 1997

Instructions

Time Allowed: 2 hours + 10 minutes to read instructions.

Materials Allowed: Casebook, rule book, class handouts, notes and other materials you have personally participated in preparing. Not allowed: hornbooks or commercial outlines.

Structure of the exam:

This exam is printed on 4 pages, numbered consecutively, beginning with this page. If you are missing any pages, notify students services or the professor immediately.

This exam consists of one continuous factual scenario with eight questions. Each question may be answered based on the factual material that precedes it.

Point and time allocation: The examination is 100 points total. Each question is allocated certain points.

Five questions are worth 5 points each. These are short answer questions. They should be answered in a few sentences.

Two questions are worth 15 or 20 points each. These questions should be answered in a few paragraphs.

One is worth 40 points. This question should be answered in a well-organized essay that is designed to demonstrate your knowledge of the applicable legal rules.

Because of the vast disparity in point allocation, you should allocate your time among the questions carefully. Allocation of points, and suggested time allocations are set out below, and in parentheses following each question.

In the event you conclude that some portion of the facts is ambiguous, incomplete, or logically inconsistent, please follow this procedure: Note in your answer the ambiguity, incompleteness or inconsistency. Then, make an assumption or extension of the facts which will enable you to answer the question in a manner which meaningfully demonstrates your knowledge of the subject matter. State in your answer the assumption or extension you are making.

Assume that Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure are the same as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, except as noted otherwise.

ÏÐÑÒ

B Construction Company, Inc., is a corporation incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in Minnesota. (Hint: § 1332(c) states: "a corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen of any State by which it has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of business.")

Rainbow Homes, Inc., is a developer of new suburban housing. It is incorporated in Wisconsin and has its principal place of business in Wisconsin. Rainbow is developing a housing development called "Multi-hued Acres" in Woodbury, Minnesota. Rainbow has contracted with B Construction Company, Inc., to build the homes.

One hundred people have bought homes from Rainbow Homes in Multi-hued Acres. All of the homes are equipped with water heaters manufactured by HW, a Wisconsin corporation whose principal place of business is in Madison, Wisconsin. HW markets its products nationwide, and provides service on its hot water heaters through offices in Minnesota. Each of the hot water heaters is equipped with a valve manufactured by Stop-rite, a Maryland corporation whose principal place of business is Maryland. Stop-rite markets its valves to water heater manufacturers, located in various parts of the country, but none are located in Minnesota. Stop-rite does not advertise in Minnesota, has no office in Minnesota, and does not provide service in Minnesota. The valves installed in the Multi-hued Acres homes are standard "off-the-shelf" valves that were not designed especially for the Minnesota market. HW hires a subcontractor to install all of its hot water heater valves, an individual named Irving Shoe. Shoe is a citizen of Wisconsin. Shoe owns a vacation home in Minnesota which he visits regularly. All of the work on the water heaters, however, is done is Wisconsin, and Shoe does no valve installation work for any company in Minnesota.

The valves installed in the Multi-hued Acres homes all are defective or were defectively installed. Several have exploded, causing property damage. All must be replaced.

E, F, and G have bought homes in Multi-hued Acres. E and G are citizens of Minnesota. F is a citizen of North Dakota. Each owns a home in which the water heater has exploded, causing $100,000 in property damage in each home.

Lawsuit I: E sues Rainbow Homes, Inc., and B Construction Company, Inc. in federal district court in Minnesota, claiming property damages under breach of warranty and products liability theories. The lawsuit is commenced by service on both defendants within the state of Minnesota. The defendants move to dismiss the suit for lack of personal and subject matter jurisdiction.. The judge grants the motion on both grounds and issues a judgment dismissing the lawsuit.

Question 1. Was the court's ruling on subject matter jurisdiction correct? Why? (5 points, 6 minutes.)

Question 2. Was the court's ruling on personal jurisdiction correct? Why? (5 points, 6 minutes.)

Lawsuit II: Thereafter, E commences a lawsuit with the same claims, against the same parties, in Minnesota state court. The defendants move for a summary judgment on claim preclusion grounds. The judge denies the motion.

Question 3. Was the court's ruling on the claim preclusion motion correct? Why? (5 points, 6 minutes.)

After a trial, the court finds that Rainbow Homes is not liable, but that B Construction is liable. The court awards damages in favor of E against B Construction.

Lawsuit III: Thereafter, E commences a new lawsuit in state court against B Construction alleging that the exploding valve caused E personal injury.

Question 4. Very briefly sketch the potential effects of preclusion in this lawsuit. (5 points, 6 minutes.)

Lawsuit IV: F brings suit against B Construction and Rainbow Homes in federal district court, seeking damages for property damages arising out of the explosion of the valve. B construction seeks a summary judgment, arguing that the issue of its breach of warranty and products liability have been litigated in the previous lawsuit. The court denies the motion.

Question 5. Was the court's denial of the motion proper? Why? (5 points, 6 minutes.)

F moves for partial summary judgment against Rainbow Homes on the grounds that Rainbow Homes' liability for breach of warranty and products liability have been determined on the merits in the previous litigation. The judge asks you, her law clerk, for advice about how to analyze this motion. In addition to other issues, she wants to know whether she must follow state law on this issue, or can develop a rule for federal courts. Also, she wants you to tell her what additional information she needs to decide the motion.

Question 6. Write a memo to the judge advising her about how to analyze this motion. (20 points, 24 minutes.)

Rainbow Homes would like to make HW, Shoe, and Stop-rite parties to the lawsuit.

Question 7. Can Rainbow Homes make HW, Shoe, and Stop-rite parties to the lawsuit? How? Your answer should discuss the use of Rules 14, 19, and 20, as well as personal and subject matter jurisdictional issues. (40 points, 48 minutes.)

Lawsuit V: G commences suit against HW in state court in Minnesota. G's complaint alleges that she represents the class of all homeowners in Multi-hued Acres whose hot water heaters have exploded or contain a defective valve. The court issues an order certifying the case as a class action. The Multi-hued Acres Citizens Association asks you to address a meeting of homeowners to explain the implications for their legal rights of the class action.

Question 8. What are the key points you will tell the homeowners about how the class action lawsuit might proceed, and what the implications are for their legal rights? (15 points, 18 minutes.)

End of Exam ¶ Have a Great Summer!