Civil Procedure

This is a tutorial lecture that introduces discovery under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Fist, I give an overview of five of the most important discovery devices, namely depositions, interrogatories, document requests, physical and mental examinations, and requests for admission. Second, I briefly describe mandatory initial disclosure obligations. Next, I discuss the three components that define the scope of discovery: relevance, privilege, and proportionality. And finally I discuss motions for protective orders, motions to compel, and sanctions--all in the context of how litigators handle discovery requests that are improper. Because this episode focuses on the basic issues of practice, I do not cover here deep history, ethical constraints, or more advanced issues of e-discovery, production methods, 30(b)(6) depositions, etc.

This episode is a recording of my conversation with Judge Katharine H. Parker, Magistrate Judge for the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Judge Parker is an authority on, among other things, electronic discovery. Our conversation here focuses primarily on lawyers' duties under Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 (and, more broadly, the scope of discovery under Rule 26).  The interview took place by teleconference on May 17, 2021. Because we recorded our conversation with Zoom, the quality of the audio is satisfactory, but not ideal.

This episode is a lecture tutorial that offers an overview of the doctrines of claim preclusion and issue preclusion.  These doctrines are also know as res judicata and collateral estoppel, respectively.  (Confusingly,) These doctrines are also sometimes jointly referred to as "res judicata."

This episode is a tutorial lecture about the Erie Doctrine. I cover a little bit of the history leading up to the Erie Doctrine and then offer advice about how to tackle an Erie issue in practice or on an exam. This is a 40-minute introduction and overview that focuses on the basics.  

This episode is a tutorial lecture about the practical application of the doctrine of removal. Removal jurisdiction describes the circumstances under which an action can be removed, by a defendant, from state court to federal court. The lecture focuses primarily on the application of Sections 1441 and 1446 of Title 28.  This is one of several episodes regarding related topics of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

This episode is a tutorial lecture about supplemental jurisdiction. This is one of several episodes on the broader topic of federal subject matter jurisdiction. This episodes focuses on the practical application of Section 1367 of Title 28.  I do not try to cover history or any other context here.

This episode is a tutorial lecture about original subject matter jurisdiction in federal courts. It introduces--and focuses exclusively on--the doctrines of federal question under 28 USC 1331 and diversity under 28 USC 1332. I do not cover class actions nor any of other (less common) bases for original subject matter jurisdiction. In this episode I also focus on a very practical application of the contemporary doctrine.  Consult other episodes for lectures about historical context and for the other bases for federal subject matter jurisdiction (esp. supplemental and removal jurisdiction).

This episode is a tutorial lecture about the doctrine of venue. I first cover the federal venue statute, 28 USC 1391. In circumstances when venue is improper, there are two follow-on options: dismissal or transfer. In circumstances when venue is proper, there are three follow-on options: proceed, dismissal, and transfer. 

This episode is a tutorial lecture about Service of Process under Federal Rule, and the 12(b)(4) and 12(b)(5) motions to dismiss. The episode focuses on a practical application of these Rules.

This episode is my interview with Alexander Ross, Jr., the lawyer who represented Robert Nicastro in J. McIntyre Machiner Ltd. v. Nicastro. The interview took place on October 14, 2020. Because we recorded our conversation with Zoom, the quality of the audio is satisfactory, but not ideal.