Chapter 18: The Federal Court System Honors Classes, Dec. 2, 2013

1. Chapter 18: The Federal Court SystemHonors Classes, Dec. 2, 2013

2. Some Conflicting Perspectives "The life of the law has not been logic, it has been experience.… The law embodies the story of a nation's development through many centuries, and it cannot be dealt with as if it contained only the axioms and corollaries of a book of mathematics." - Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., 1880 “The law is an ass.” - Mr. Bumble, Oliver Twist, 1838

3. An overview of a trial’s players

4. The Owners’ Manual says… …very little about the judicial system. Article III, Section 1: “The Judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” Congress has filled in the blanks.

5. From those humble beginnings… … we get the federal judiciary.

6. State AND federal court systems We have both a federal and state court system. Why? • Framers wanted a federal system to interpret federal laws. • Framers also recognized risk of home cooking in suits involving people from different states.

7. Most cases are filed in state court Source for graphic: Federal Judicial Center So how do you decide which court to pick? It depends on your case.

8. First question: Do you have the option to sue in federal court? To do so, you need either – • A “federal question” or • “diversity jurisdiction.”* N.B. In this context, “jurisdiction” means that a court has the power to hear a case. Also, I abbreviate “jurisdiction” as “jx.”

9. Federal question jx • Does the lawsuit involve a question about the Constitution or federal law? • If yes, then you may (but need not in most cases) file in federal court. • “Exclusive jx” in fed’lct in a few cases – ambassadors, patents, etc. • Most cases involve “concurrent jx” – both state and fed’lcts can hear it.

10. Diversity jx: another possibility Need two components: people and money

11. Second question: Which is better strategically? It depends on a number of factors. • Is it one that a jury likely will find sympathetic? Probably want state court. • State court judges are elected in AL; some are viewed by some as friendlier to plaintiffs. • Are you likely to get “home cooked”? Sue in federal court. • Does the case involve a complicated question of law? Maybe better off with a federal judge trial.

12. Let’s walk through the process • After graduating from Mc-T, Dubby O’Dowd decides to pursue his dream of playing Gavroche in Les Miserableson Broadway. Not Dubby, but it could’ve been.

13. The facts (cont.) He negotiates a contract with Anne Catherine Rodriguez (better known to New Yorkers as “the other A-Rod”) for a 100-run minimum of Les Misat $1,000 per show.

14. The facts (cont.) • On opening night Katherine Gilreathheckles Dubbyand throws tomatoes at him. • One tomato hits him in the left eye and temporarily blinds him. • The show closes after one performance.

15. Dubby wants justice. • Dubby can sue – • A-rod in a civil action for breach of contract. • (He also could also sue Katherine in a civil action for, let’s say, the “torts” of assault and intentional infliction of emotional distress, but let’s just focus on the action against A-Rod.) • The State of New York and maybe the federal governmentcould also sue by – • Bringing criminal charges against Katherine for assault with a deadly tomato, • but they probably couldn’t do much about the breach of contract.

16. Let’s start with the civil case: O’Dowd v. Rodriguez First question: where can Dubby file the suit – federal or state court? Is there a federal question? • Nah. This would be a simple contract dispute. How about diversity jx? • The matter in dispute exceeds $75,000 – here, a $100,000 contract. • And let’s say Dubby is from Alabama but A-Rod lives in New York. • So, diversity jx is an option.

17. O’Dowd v. Rodriguez (cont.) • So a complaint is filed with the federaldistrict court. • There are 94 in the US. • Mobile has one, and here’s a picture of it: • The district court has “original jx” – i.e., where a case first starts. • Dubby is the “plaintiff” – i.e., the person filing the lawsuit; A-Rod is the “defendant” – i.e., the person against whom the lawsuit is filed. • A “complaint” is the document that the plaintiff files with the court setting out the facts and arguing why the defendant owes the plaintiff money.

18. O’Dowd v. Rodriguez (cont.) • The case is placed on the “docket.” • After some “discovery” – i.e., the process of gathering facts – the trial begins. • Dubby wins at the trial level. • The jury decided that, while 18 year-old Dubby made for a sketchy 11 year-old boy in the play, A-Rod knew what she getting into. A typical stack of paper in a lawsuit.

19. O’Dowd v. Rodriguez (cont.) • A-Rod is outraged. She decides to appeal the decision to an appellate court. • Her appeal will be filed in one of the 12 U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals (here, for the 2nd Circuit; AL is in the 11th Circuit).

20. O’Dowd v. Rodriguez (cont.) • The right to appeal at this point is automatic; the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals (pictured below) cannot reject the request for an appeal.

21. O’Dowd v. Rodriguez (cont.) Some key differences between a trial court and an appellate court: • On appeal, the Circuit Court takes the facts in the record as given – no new discovery. The appellate court will decide whether the trial court made a mistake of law. • There is no jury on appeal. A panel of judges makes the call. The Circuit Court finds for Dubby again and upholds the trial court’s decision. A-Rod is undaunted and wants to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

22. O’Dowd v. Rodriguez (cont.) She files a petition for a writ of certiorari (i.e., a request to the USSC that they hear the appeal). • Around 8,000 “petitions for cert” are filed and only a couple of hundred are granted each year. • Cert may be granted if, for instance, the Circuit Courts are split or if there is a new question about the Constitution or federal law.

23. O’Dowd v. Rodriguez (cont.) Certiorari (cont.) • The USSC has complete discretion on whether to accept a case on appeal. • The “rule of four”: at least 4 of the 9 Supreme Court justices must vote to accept the appeal. • Most cases where cert is granted are dealt with summarily. Only 80 or so cases are decided with full opinions.

24. O’Dowd v. Rodriguez (cont.) Will the USSC take this case? Almost certainly not. • No novel question, here; just a contract dispute. • Highly unlikely there is a split in the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal. Artist’s rendering of A-Rod upon getting the news that the USSC won’t grant cert:

25. What about the criminal case? The process is similar to the civil case in that you first must decide whether to go into state or federal court. • Here, let’s assume there is afederal statute outlawing assault using tomatoes and that the federal government wants to prosecute. It’s different from a civil action in that the lawsuit is brought by the government, not a private citizens. • So here, the case would be called U.S. v. Gilreath. • Instead of a plaintiff v. a defendant, in a criminal case it’s the “prosecution” (or State) v. a defendant.

26. NY v. Gilreath After the prosecution and defense finish their cases, a jury must decide whether Katherine is guilty. • Usually it takes a unanimous jury verdict, although some states are experimenting with non-unanimous verdicts. Let’s assume the jury comes back with a finding of “guilty” and Katherine is sentenced to 6 months in jail. So it’s off to the Graybar Hotel for her.

27. NY v. Gilreath(cont.) • Let’s assume she appeals to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and that court upholds the finding and sentence. • What’s her last recourse? Petitioning the USSC for a writ of certiorari. • Now let’s assume that – miracle of miracles – the Supremes decide to hear the case. • Maybe they’ve never heard a case involving assault by tomatoes and they think the penalty may be cruel and unusual punishment and, therefore, unconstitutional. • So the case gets set for oral argument before the highest court in the land.

28. NY v. Gilreath(cont.) • Why does the USSC get to decide whether something is unconstitutional? B/c of our old friend, Marbury v. Madison.

29. NY v. Gilreath (cont.) • In the appeal before the USSC, the U.S. will be represented by the Solicitor General’s office. • Briefs are filed, perhaps including amicus curiae (i.e., “friend of the court”) briefs. • Then there will be oral argument, with each side usually getting 30 minutes. An SG looking dapper before Supreme Court oral argument

30. NY v. Gilreath (cont.) • Court takes the case under advisement and goes off to confer. • They will reconvene in a conference to discuss the case. The Chief Justice (currently, John Roberts) will take a poll of the Associate Justices in order of seniority, and then the debate begins.

31. NY v. Gilreath (cont.) • In this, the Court decides along a 5-4 vote that the conviction must be overturned. CJ Roberts is in the majority and assigns the case to himself to write the majority decision. • Any Justice in the majority may write a concurring opinion, but only the majority opinion has precedential value. It is the “opinion of the Court.” • Moreover, any Justice may write a dissenting opinion. • Katherine goes free! (Actually, case will probably be remanded for further action.)

32. A word or two on the judiciary • Federal judges are appointed for life. They can serve as long as they exhibit “good behavior.” • Can be removed only through impeachment. • 15 Federal judges have been impeached (on grounds ranging from bribery to sexual misconduct with clerks); 4 acquitted, 8 convicted, others resigned. • Most recently in 2010 – Thomas Porteous from LA, on grounds of taking bribes from lawyers).

33. Judicial activism v. judicial restraint • There is a raging debate about judicial restraint v. judicial activism. • Should judges interpret the Constitution according to the words of the Constitution and the intent and values of the Framers? Or should it be interpreted by applying the words to the values of today? • See http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/289637-1