Also known as: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure · FRCP · Fed. R. Civ. P.
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A body of procedural rules governing civil litigation in the federal district courts. The rules were adopted by the Supreme Court under authority delegated by Congress in the Rules Enabling Act and address pleading, pretrial practice, trial procedure, and judgment.
Felicia Fuentes, counsel for Fulton Shipping, produced a privileged email during discovery in a contract dispute. Upon realizing the error the next day, she immediately notified opposing counsel and demanded return of the document under the procedure in Rule 26(b)(5)(B). The court held that the prompt steps preserved the privilege.
Flora Ford, a citizen of State A, sued Freeman Engineering, a State B corporation, in federal court on diversity grounds. State law required personal service on an executor, but Ford served the defendant by leaving papers with a resident of suitable age under the federal rule. The court upheld service because the federal rule applied.
Frank Fisher, defendant in a state-court tort action, filed a notice of removal in the federal district court for the district where the state action was pending. The notice contained a short statement of grounds, was signed under Rule 11, and included copies of all served process and pleadings.
Fiona Foster and other pharmacies filed a diversity class action against Fidelity Trust seeking statutory interest on late payments. A state statute barred class actions for such claims, but the court applied Rule 23 to decide certification because the federal rule controlled.
Forrest Falconer sued Falcon Dynamics in federal court. The action was dismissed for failure to prosecute. When Falconer refiled the same claim in state court, the defendant argued claim preclusion. The court looked to state law rather than Rule 41(b) to determine whether the dismissal counted as an adjudication on the merits.
Fatou Fall filed a complaint alleging an antitrust conspiracy among telecommunications firms based on parallel conduct and general assertions of agreement. The defendants moved to dismiss. The court applied the plausibility standard and dismissed the complaint for lack of factual enhancement showing an actual agreement.
In 1984 the divestiture of AT&T's local telephone business created seven regional service monopolies known as Regional Bell Operating Companies or Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers. More than a decade later Congress enacted the Telecommunications Act of 1996 which restructured local telephone markets and imposed duties on the ILECs to facilitate entry by competitive local exchange carriers through resale of services at wholesale rates, leasing of unbundled network elements, or interconnection of facilities. William Twombly and Lawrence Marcus filed suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of a putative class of all subscribers of local telephone and high-speed internet services from February 8, 1996 to the present. They named as defendants four consolidated ILECs: BellSouth Corporation, Qwest Communications International Inc., SBC Communications Inc., and Verizon Communications Inc. The complaint alleged that these ILECs conspired to restrain trade by engaging in parallel conduct to inhibit CLECs, including unfair agreements for network access, inferior connections, overcharging, and billing practices designed to sabotage CLEC customer relations. The complaint further alleged that the ILECs agreed not to compete against one another in their respective territories. This agreement was inferred from their common failure to pursue business opportunities in contiguous markets and from a statement by Qwest CEO Richard Notebaert that competing in another ILEC's territory might be a good way to turn a quick dollar but that does not make it right. The complaint asserted that in light of the absence of meaningful competition among the ILECs and their parallel course of conduct the defendants had entered into a contract combination or conspiracy to prevent competitive entry and to allocate customers and markets. The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim. It concluded that the alleged parallel behavior was fully explained by each ILEC's independent interest in defending its own territory and that the complaint did not allege facts suggesting the decision to refrain from competing elsewhere was contrary to the ILECs' apparent economic interests. The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed, holding that plus factors need not be pleaded and that allegations of parallel conduct suffice if they leave open the possibility of collusion. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to address the proper standard for pleading an antitrust conspiracy through allegations of parallel conduct.
View caseA valid Federal Rule of Civil Procedure that directly addresses an issue governs in diversity actions if the rule is arguably procedural and does not abridge, enlarge, or modify substantive rights under the Rules Enabling Act. Courts first determine whether the federal rule is on point before turning to Erie analysis.
When a court denies a motion to dismiss, the responsive pleading must be served within fourteen days after notice of the denial under Rule 12(a)(4)(A). Failure to meet this deadline can result in entry of default.
A notice of removal must be signed pursuant to Rule 11, contain a short and plain statement of the grounds for removal, and include copies of all process, pleadings, and orders served on the defendant.
Yes. Rule 23 is a valid procedural rule that governs whether an action may proceed as a class action in federal court and displaces conflicting state statutes that limit representative suits.
…the parties, service of process shall be made in the manner prescribed by state law or that set forth in Rule 4 (d) (1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. On February 6, 1963, petitioner, a citizen of Ohio, filed her complaint in the District Court for the District of Massachusetts, claiming damages in excess of $10,000 for personal…