Home›Law›⚖️ Civil Procedure
⚖️ Law · Civil Procedure

Memory tricks for civil procedure

Jurisdiction, pleadings, discovery, Erie doctrine, class actions, and appeals — civ pro made clear.

Community
📋
Civil Procedure Forum
Ask questions · Share techniques
💬
Civil Procedure Study Room
Live · Study together now
⚖️ Civil Procedure

Memory Tricks

Proven Mnemonics & Acronyms — fast to learn, hard to forget.

🎥 How Flashcards Work
A quick walkthrough of tap-to-flip, rating, and how card colors track what you're struggling with.
← Back Next →
Civil Procedure deck1 of 9
Tap to flip
← →
How well do YOU think you know this?
Easy Medium Hard Harder
Tap to flip back
Civil Procedure deck
Easy0
Medium0
Hard0
Harder0
Jurisdiction
SPJ (S=Subject matter jurisdiction, P=Personal jurisdiction, J=Jurisdiction threshold)
Subject Matter · Personal · Jurisdiction — need both to proceed
Subject Matter · Personal · Jurisdiction — need both to proceed
Before any federal court can hear a case, it needs two green lights: Subject Matter Jurisdiction (the right kind of case) AND Personal Jurisdiction (power over the defendant). Miss either one and the case gets dismissed — no matter how strong the merits. SPJ = both required, always.
Federal question SMJ
Case arises under federal law, treaties, or the Constitution (28 U.S.C. §1331). No amount-in-controversy requirement.
Diversity SMJ
Complete diversity of citizenship (no plaintiff same state as any defendant) + amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 (28 U.S.C. §1332).
Personal jurisdiction
Power over the defendant — requires either presence, domicile, consent, or minimum contacts with the forum state (Int'l Shoe).
📖 Full Lesson →
Difficulty: Beginner
🎥 Watch Instead
▶
Video coming soon
This lesson's animated video hasn't been made yet — check back soon.
Flashcard
🃏 Jurisdiction
SPJ
Tap to flip
🃏 Answer
SPJ (S=Subject matter jurisdiction, P=Personal jurisdiction, J=Jurisdiction threshold)
Federal question SMJCase arises under federal law, treaties, or the Constitution (28 U.S.C. §1331). No amount-in-controversy requirement.
Diversity SMJComplete diversity of citizenship (no plaintiff same state as any defendant) + amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 (28 U.S.C. §1332).
Personal jurisdictionPower over the defendant — requires either presence, domicile, consent, or minimum contacts with the forum state (Int'l Shoe).
Tap to flip back
Pleadings
CAN
Complaint · Answer · (possible) counterclaim/cross-claim · Notice pleading standard
Complaint · Answer · (possible) counterclaim/cross-claim · Notice pleading standard
A civil case begins with pleadings. CAN: Complaint (plaintiff's claim) → Answer (defendant's response, must be filed within 21 days in federal court) → possible counterclaims or cross-claims. Federal courts use notice pleading — plausible claim, not detailed proof (Twombly/Iqbal standard).
Complaint
Must contain: short plain statement of jurisdiction · short plain statement of the claim showing entitlement to relief · demand for relief (FRCP Rule 8).
Twombly/Iqbal
Pleading must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim — not just possible. Conclusory labels and legal conclusions don't count.
Answer
Defendant must admit, deny, or state lack of knowledge for each allegation. Affirmative defenses must be raised or they're waived.
📖 Full Lesson →
Difficulty: Intermediate
🎥 Watch Instead
▶
Video coming soon
This lesson's animated video hasn't been made yet — check back soon.
Flashcard
🃏 Pleadings
CAN
Tap to flip
🃏 Answer
ComplaintMust contain: short plain statement of jurisdiction · short plain statement of the claim showing entitlement to relief · demand for relief (FRCP Rule 8).
Twombly/IqbalPleading must allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim — not just possible. Conclusory labels and legal conclusions don't count.
AnswerDefendant must admit, deny, or state lack of knowledge for each allegation. Affirmative defenses must be raised or they're waived.
Tap to flip back
Venue & Removal
WARD (W=Where defendant resides, A=Activities giving rise to claim, R=Removal to federal court, D=Discretionary transfer)
Where defendant resides · Any district where events occurred · Removal · Diversity cases
Where defendant resides · Any district where events occurred · Removal · Diversity cases
Even with proper jurisdiction, the case must be in the right district. WARD: venue is proper Where defendant resides, Any district where substantial events occurred, or where any defendant resides if all defendants are in the same state. Defendants can Remove state cases to federal court if federal jurisdiction exists.
Venue (28 USC §1391)
Proper in: district where any defendant resides (if all in same state) OR where substantial part of events occurred OR where any defendant subject to PJ (if no other district works).
Transfer
Court may transfer to any district where case could have been filed, for convenience of parties and witnesses or in interest of justice (§1404).
Removal
Defendant removes state case to federal court within 30 days of service. All defendants must agree. Plaintiff cannot remove. Cannot remove diversity case if any defendant is a citizen of the forum state.
📖 Full Lesson →
Difficulty: Intermediate
🎥 Watch Instead
▶
Video coming soon
This lesson's animated video hasn't been made yet — check back soon.
Flashcard
🃏 Venue & Removal
WARD
Tap to flip
🃏 Answer
WARD (W=Where defendant resides, A=Activities giving rise to claim, R=Removal to federal court, D=Discretionary transfer)
Venue (28 USC §1391)Proper in: district where any defendant resides (if all in same state) OR where substantial part of events occurred OR where any defendant subject to PJ (if no other district works).
TransferCourt may transfer to any district where case could have been filed, for convenience of parties and witnesses or in interest of justice (§1404).
RemovalDefendant removes state case to federal court within 30 days of service. All defendants must agree. Plaintiff cannot remove. Cannot remove diversity case if any defendant is a citizen of the forum state.
Tap to flip back
Discovery
DRIED (D=Depositions, R=Requests for production, I=Interrogatories, E=Examination, D=Disclosures)
Depositions · Requests for production · Interrogatories · Expert disclosures · Document requests
Depositions · Requests for production · Interrogatories · Expert disclosures · Document requests
Discovery is the pre-trial exchange of information. DRIED covers the main tools: Depositions (sworn oral testimony) · Requests for production (documents/things) · Interrogatories (written questions, answered under oath) · Expert disclosures · ESI (electronically stored information). Scope: anything relevant and not privileged.
Depositions
Oral examination of a witness under oath, recorded by a court reporter. Can depose any person, not just parties. Limited to 10 per side (FRCP).
Interrogatories
Written questions answered in writing under oath. Only served on parties (not non-party witnesses). Limited to 25 per side in federal court.
Work product doctrine
Attorney's mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, and legal theories prepared in anticipation of litigation are protected from discovery.
📖 Full Lesson →
Difficulty: Intermediate
🎥 Watch Instead
▶
Video coming soon
This lesson's animated video hasn't been made yet — check back soon.
Flashcard
🃏 Discovery
DRIED
Tap to flip
🃏 Answer
DRIED (D=Depositions, R=Requests for production, I=Interrogatories, E=Examination, D=Disclosures)
DepositionsOral examination of a witness under oath, recorded by a court reporter. Can depose any person, not just parties. Limited to 10 per side (FRCP).
InterrogatoriesWritten questions answered in writing under oath. Only served on parties (not non-party witnesses). Limited to 25 per side in federal court.
Work product doctrineAttorney's mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, and legal theories prepared in anticipation of litigation are protected from discovery.
Tap to flip back
Summary Judgment
NGGD (N=No genuine dispute, G=of a material fact, G=moving party is entitled to judgment, D=as a matter of law) — summary judgment standard
No Genuine dispute of material fact · Judge decides as a matter of law
No Genuine dispute of material fact · Judge decides as a matter of law
Summary judgment (Rule 56) lets a court end a case before trial when there's no genuine dispute about the material facts — only a legal question remains. NGGD: No Genuine dispute of material fact → Judge Decides as a matter of law. The non-moving party gets all reasonable inferences in their favor.
Standard
Moving party must show no genuine dispute of material fact. Non-moving party must point to specific evidence — cannot rest on allegations alone (Celotex).
Material fact
A fact that could affect the outcome under governing law. Disputes about immaterial facts don't preclude summary judgment.
Genuine dispute
A reasonable jury could return a verdict for the non-moving party. If no reasonable jury could, summary judgment is appropriate.
📖 Full Lesson →
Difficulty: Intermediate
🎥 Watch Instead
▶
Video coming soon
This lesson's animated video hasn't been made yet — check back soon.
Flashcard
🃏 Summary Judgment
NGGD
Tap to flip
🃏 Answer
NGGD (N=No genuine dispute, G=of a material fact, G=moving party is entitled to judgment, D=as a matter of law) — summary judgment standard
StandardMoving party must show no genuine dispute of material fact. Non-moving party must point to specific evidence — cannot rest on allegations alone (Celotex).
Material factA fact that could affect the outcome under governing law. Disputes about immaterial facts don't preclude summary judgment.
Genuine disputeA reasonable jury could return a verdict for the non-moving party. If no reasonable jury could, summary judgment is appropriate.
Tap to flip back
Erie Doctrine
Erie Doctrine (E=state law on substantive matters, R=federal rules on procedure, I=Identical outcome test, E=Equity and fairness) = State law on substance · Federal law on procedure
Erie Railroad v. Tompkins — no federal general common law
Erie Railroad v. Tompkins — no federal general common law
In diversity cases, federal courts apply state substantive law but federal procedural law. ERIE: Erie Railroad v. Tompkins (1938) overruled Swift v. Tyson — there is no federal general common law. Outcome determinative test: if the choice of law would significantly affect the outcome, it's substantive → apply state law.
Substance vs. procedure
Substantive (state): elements of claims, statutes of limitations, standards of liability. Procedural (federal): pleading standards, discovery rules, trial procedures.
Outcome determinative
Guaranty Trust test: would applying federal vs. state law significantly affect the outcome? If yes → substantive → apply state law.
Hanna v. Plumer
If a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure directly conflicts with state law, the FRCP governs if it's valid under the Rules Enabling Act.
📖 Full Lesson →
Difficulty: Advanced
🎥 Watch Instead
▶
Video coming soon
This lesson's animated video hasn't been made yet — check back soon.
Flashcard
🃏 Erie Doctrine
The Erie Doctrine — ERIE
Tap to flip
🃏 Answer
Erie Doctrine (E=state law on substantive matters, R=federal rules on procedure, I=Identical outcome test, E=Equity and fairness) = State law on substance · Federal law on procedure
Substance vs. procedureSubstantive (state): elements of claims, statutes of limitations, standards of liability. Procedural (federal): pleading standards, discovery rules, trial procedures.
Outcome determinativeGuaranty Trust test: would applying federal vs. state law significantly affect the outcome? If yes → substantive → apply state law.
Hanna v. PlumerIf a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure directly conflicts with state law, the FRCP governs if it's valid under the Rules Enabling Act.
Tap to flip back
Class Actions
CANT (C=Commonality, A=Adequacy of representation, N=Numerosity, T=Typicality) — Rule 23 class action requirements
Commonality · Adequacy · Numerosity · Typicality
Commonality · Adequacy · Numerosity · Typicality
A class action lets many plaintiffs sue together under Rule 23. CANT covers the four prerequisites that must ALL be satisfied: Commonality (shared legal questions) · Adequacy (representative adequately protects the class) · Numerosity (so many members individual suits are impracticable) · Typicality (rep's claims typical of the class).
Numerosity
Class so numerous joinder of all members is impracticable. No magic number — courts look at size, geography, and practicality. Often 40+ members suffice.
Commonality
Questions of law or fact common to the class. At least one common question whose answer will resolve an issue central to all claims (Wal-Mart v. Dukes).
Typicality
Representative's claims arise from the same event or practice and are based on the same legal theory as class members' claims.
📖 Full Lesson →
Difficulty: Advanced
🎥 Watch Instead
▶
Video coming soon
This lesson's animated video hasn't been made yet — check back soon.
Flashcard
🃏 Class Actions
CANT
Tap to flip
🃏 Answer
CANT (C=Commonality, A=Adequacy of representation, N=Numerosity, T=Typicality) — Rule 23 class action requirements
NumerosityClass so numerous joinder of all members is impracticable. No magic number — courts look at size, geography, and practicality. Often 40+ members suffice.
CommonalityQuestions of law or fact common to the class. At least one common question whose answer will resolve an issue central to all claims (Wal-Mart v. Dukes).
TypicalityRepresentative's claims arise from the same event or practice and are based on the same legal theory as class members' claims.
Tap to flip back
Preclusion
RJ (Res Judicata — claim preclusion) + CJ (Collateral estoppel — issue preclusion)
Res Judicata (claim preclusion) · Collateral Estoppel (issue preclusion)
Res Judicata (claim preclusion) · Collateral Estoppel (issue preclusion)
Preclusion doctrines prevent relitigation. RJ = Res Judicata (claim preclusion): a final judgment on the merits bars all claims that were or could have been raised in the first suit. CJ = Collateral Estoppel (issue preclusion): a specific issue actually litigated and decided cannot be relitigated.
Res judicata elements
Same parties (or those in privity) · same claim (transactional test — same nucleus of facts) · final judgment on the merits · by a court of competent jurisdiction.
Collateral estoppel
Issue was actually litigated · actually decided · essential to the prior judgment · same party to be bound was a party in the prior action.
Non-mutual CE
Offensive: new plaintiff uses prior finding against defendant (allowed but courts have discretion). Defensive: defendant uses prior finding against plaintiff (generally allowed).
📖 Full Lesson →
Difficulty: Advanced
🎥 Watch Instead
▶
Video coming soon
This lesson's animated video hasn't been made yet — check back soon.
Flashcard
🃏 Preclusion
Preclusion — res judicata vs collateral estoppel?
Tap to flip
🃏 Answer
RJ (Res Judicata — claim preclusion) + CJ (Collateral estoppel — issue preclusion)
Res judicata elementsSame parties (or those in privity) · same claim (transactional test — same nucleus of facts) · final judgment on the merits · by a court of competent jurisdiction.
Collateral estoppelIssue was actually litigated · actually decided · essential to the prior judgment · same party to be bound was a party in the prior action.
Non-mutual CEOffensive: new plaintiff uses prior finding against defendant (allowed but courts have discretion). Defensive: defendant uses prior finding against plaintiff (generally allowed).
Tap to flip back
Appeals
FIND (F=Final judgment rule, I=Issues must be preserved, N=No new evidence, D=Deferential review standards)
Final judgment rule · Interlocutory exceptions · New trial motions · De novo vs. clear error
Final judgment rule · Interlocutory exceptions · New trial motions · De novo vs. clear error
Appeals are not automatic do-overs. FIND: Final judgment rule — courts of appeals only review final decisions · Interlocutory exceptions exist (injunctions, collateral orders) · New trial motions must be filed first · Standard of review matters: De novo for legal questions, clear error for facts, abuse of discretion for judge's choices.
Final judgment rule
28 USC §1291: courts of appeals jurisdiction over final decisions only — no piecemeal appeals. Must wait until case fully resolved below.
Interlocutory appeals
Exceptions: §1292(a) injunctions · collateral order doctrine (Cohen) · §1292(b) certified questions · mandamus for extraordinary cases.
Standards of review
De novo (fresh): legal questions, statutory interpretation. Clear error: factual findings (highly deferential). Abuse of discretion: evidentiary rulings, procedural decisions.
📖 Full Lesson →
Difficulty: Intermediate
🎥 Watch Instead
▶
Video coming soon
This lesson's animated video hasn't been made yet — check back soon.
Flashcard
🃏 Appeals
FIND
Tap to flip
🃏 Answer
FIND (F=Final judgment rule, I=Issues must be preserved, N=No new evidence, D=Deferential review standards)
Final judgment rule28 USC §1291: courts of appeals jurisdiction over final decisions only — no piecemeal appeals. Must wait until case fully resolved below.
Interlocutory appealsExceptions: §1292(a) injunctions · collateral order doctrine (Cohen) · §1292(b) certified questions · mandamus for extraordinary cases.
Standards of reviewDe novo (fresh): legal questions, statutory interpretation. Clear error: factual findings (highly deferential). Abuse of discretion: evidentiary rulings, procedural decisions.
Tap to flip back
🎓 Common Exam Questions