William Mitchell College of Law

Civil Procedure -- Examination -- Spring 1999

Instructions

Time: Two hours.

Permitted materials: Your Rule Book with any annotations you have made on its pages. Paste-ins not permitted (tabs are ok).

This examination consists of 1 1 pages, numbered sequentially, counting this page. If you are missing any pages, contact the Student Services Office at once.

This test contains three separate factual scenarios. Each scenario describes, in chronological order, the events concerning a lawsuit. Questions are interspersed in the scenarios. Answer each of the interspersed questions based on all of the facts that precede the question in that scenario. There are 8 questions.

Point and time allocation: The examination is 100 points total. Each question is allocated certain points. A recommended time allocation for each question is also stated.

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 that will enable you to answer the question in a manner that meaningfully demonstrates your knowledge of the subject matter. State in your answer the assumption or extension you are making.

Answer this exam in your blue books, not on this exam paper. Please write clearly. If your writing is unclear, please write on every-other line and on one side of the page only.

ÏÐÑÒ

Part I. Part I consists of one continuous factual scenario with 6 questions interspersed.

Facts of Part I:

Zap Corporation (Zap) makes premium quality outdoor grills. Zap is incorporated in Wisconsin and has its principal place of business (the plant at which it manufactures the grills) in Iowa. Temp, Inc. (Temp) is an Iowa corporation that manufactures food thermometers at its only facility, which is in Iowa. Zap installs Temp thermometers on some models of its grills. Temp sells about 1% of its thermometers to Zap, and sells the rest to other manufacturers of cooking equipment. Zap does not advertise its grills, but sells them by displaying at "Home and Garden Shows" around the country. Ahmed owns a Turkish restaurant (Café Ahmed) in Minnesota. Ahmed is a citizen of Minnesota. He purchased a Zap Premium 1000 grill from Zap at the Minneapolis Home and Garden Show. Ahmed uses the grill to cook kebabs at Café Ahmed. The Premium 1000 is equipped with a Temp meat thermometer.

On May 7, 1997, Rose ordered chicken kebab at Café Ahmed. The chicken was undercooked and Rose became ill. Rose was born and raised in Iowa, but has come to Minnesota to go to college. She does not intend to stay in Minnesota when she graduates, and does not know where she will move, except that she plans not to move back to Iowa. Two days later, Paul ate similarly undercooked chicken at the Café and became ill. Paul was born and raised in Minnesota, but is a resident of Iowa for a year on a special assignment. He was in Minnesota on a visit when he ate the chicken, and then returned to Iowa.

Rose and Paul independently approach lawyer Lyle in April 1999 to seek recovery for the illnesses they suffered as a result of the food they consumed at Café Ahmed. Lyle is considering claims against Ahmed for negligent preparation of the food, Zap for defectively designed and manufactured grill, and Temp for a defectively designed and manufactured thermometer. Lyle's legal research discloses the following:

Iowa and Minnesota have rules of civil procedure that are identical to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Iowa's statute of limitations for tort suits is one year. Minnesota's statute of limitations for tort suits is two years.

Iowa courts have developed a "choice of law" rule for tort cases that uses the statute of limitations of the state in which the injury occurred.

Minnesota courts have developed a "choice of law" rule for tort cases that uses the statute of limitations of the state in which the tort was committed.

Lyle directs the following questions (Questions 1-4) to you as his law clerk. Write a succinct email to Lyle in response to each question. Assume that Rose and Paul each has suffered injuries in excess of $75,000.

Question 1. May I join Paul and Rose as plaintiffs in a single suit against Ahmed in Minnesota state court? Explain your reasoning. (Do not discuss jurisdiction.) (8 points, 10 minutes)

Question 2. If I bring suit on behalf of Paul against Ahmed and Temp in federal court in Iowa, what statute of limitations will apply? Explain your reasoning. (8 points, 10 minutes)

Question 3. I am considering bringing a suit on behalf of Paul against Zap in State court in Wisconsin. I am aware that Zap exhibits at Home and Garden Shows in Wisconsin. If I serve Zap's president Zelda with a summons and complaint when she is actually present at the Wisconsin Home and Garden Show, will the Wisconsin state court have personal jurisdiction in the Paul vs. Zap lawsuit? Explain your reasoning. (8 points, 10 minutes)

Question 4. I would like to bring a single suit with both Paul and Rose as plaintiffs in federal court in either Iowa or Minnesota. As defendants, I want to name one or more of Ahmed, Temp, and Zap. Please write me a memo telling me which such suits would be permitted by jurisdictional rules, and which would be prohibited by jurisdictional rules. Explain your reasoning. (25 points, 30 minutes)

Lyle brings a suit (Suit I) with Paul as plaintiff and Zap as defendant in federal court in Iowa. The suit asserts a claim that the grill manufactured by Zap had a defective burner and that the Temp thermometer was inaccurate, and that the defects were the proximate cause of Paul's illness. Zap's lawyer, Liz, would like to get Temp into the suit. She is considering using either Rule 14 or Rule 19.

Question 5. As Liz's law clerk, write her a succinct email advising her about the possibility of accomplishing her purpose by means of each of these two rules. (13 points, 15 minutes)

The court denies Liz's request to join Temp in the lawsuit. The suit proceeds to trial. The court rules in favor of Paul, finding that Zap failed to use reasonable care in designing and manufacturing the grill, and that its lack of reasonable care was the proximate cause of Paul's illness. The court also finds that the Temp thermometer was not defective.

Lyle now brings Suit II, in which Rose sues Zap and Temp. As in Suit I, this suit alleges that the burner and the thermometer were defective. Zap seeks to have Rose's suit barred by claim preclusion. Rose and Temp each move to have the court apply issue preclusion.

Question 6. As the judge's law clerk, advise her how to rule on each of these requests. (17 points, 20 minutes)

End of Part I

ïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïð

Part II. Part II consists of a short factual scenario with one question.

Facts for Part II. Sam, a citizen of Virginia, has in his possession a painting worth $50,000. Carla, Clem, and Cleo each claim to be the owner of the painting. Carla and Clem are citizens of Maryland. Cleo is a citizen of Virginia.

Question 7. Is there a way in which Sam can have a single court determine which of the three claimants is the proper owner of the painting? Explain, citing applicable rules and statutes. (8 points, 10 minutes)

End of Part II

ïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïðïð

Part III. Part III consists of one factual scenario with one question.

Facts for Part III: Lawyer Lily represents Burger, the owner of a small business located about a mile from the Smelle Chemical Corporation. Burger approaches Lily about a major chemical spill at the Smelle plant. Burger feels that the public's fear of the spill has affected her business. She would like Lily's advice on filing suit against Smelle. Lily learns that Renee, a farmer, had brought a suit against seeking damages for injury to her corn crop allegedly caused by the same chemical spill, and also seeking injunctive relief against Smelle to prevent future spills. The suit was a class action brought on behalf of the class of all farmers and storeowners located within one mile of Smelle's plant. Lily learns that Renee's class action suit was settled. In the settlement, the court entered judgment ordering Smelle to take certain corrective safety actions, and awarding substantial attorneys fees to Renee's lawyers. The settlement provided no monetary relief to the members of the class.

Question 8. As Lily's law clerk, write a memo to her advising her about whether Burger's lawsuit against Smelle would be barred by the class action judgment. If you would need more information to provide the advice, specify what additional information you would need and how the new information would affect your advice. (13 points, 15 minutes)

End of Exam

Have a Terrific Summer

ÍÎ