Civil procedure, from forum to judgment
Civil Procedure and Conflict Resolution · Prof. Coyne & Prof. Dimitriadis · MSLAW · Fall 2026
The whole arc, from forum to judgment
Coyne’s overview chart is the spine of this page. Everything above the Erie section is examinable on 10.7.26.
Casebook: Hazard, Fletcher, Bundy & Bradt, Pleading and Procedure (12th ed.). The syllabus skips Pennoyer and Harris v. Balk and begins at International Shoe, p. 58. Outline draft due 10.5.26; midterm 10.7.26.
Civil procedure decides which court may act, who must participate, what must be alleged and proved, how information becomes available, and which decisions stay open to challenge. This suite expands Professor Coyne's one-page overview into the decisions it compresses, following the same route.
Federal procedure is the backbone; Massachusetts differences are marked where they exist. A federal court sitting in Massachusetts uses federal rules — it does not switch to state rules because state substantive law governs.
Reference date: 9 September 2026. The federal baseline includes amendments effective 1 December 2025, including new Rule 16.1 and changes to Rules 16 and 26. Proposed future amendments are not operative here, and the Massachusetts Rule 11 version effective 1 January 2027 is not the baseline. Local rules, standing orders, and case-management orders add requirements this suite does not carry. Case ages are 2026 minus the decision year — the age of that decision, not of the doctrine.
Learning the reasoning, not just the rules? This suite is the reference: rules, Massachusetts differences, cases, and laboratories. The companion civil procedure through analysis teaches the method underneath it — how to decide what a court may do next — with five worked problems. And civil procedure by its elements takes six of these rules apart requirement by requirement, with the stage, the burden, and whether each one survives being left out. For the reading skill that comes first, reading for triggers works an original pattern cue by cue: what each phrase makes you test, and what to write.
The course, in the order it runs
Prof. Coyne’s sequence, not the casebook’s. The flowchart below is the spine of a single case; this is the spine of the term. Everything above the line is examinable on 10.7.26.
- 8.24.26Methods of resolving disputes
- 8.26.26Remedies and damages · end of Chapter 1 3 cases
- 8.28.26Due process and defenses · Rules 4 and 12 3 cases
- week of 8.31.26Choosing the proper court · Chapter 2 opens 3 cases
- 9.9 & 9.11.26Problems with jurisdiction 4 cases
- week of 9.14.26Long-arm statutes, notice, consent and objection 7 cases
- 9.21.26Subject matter jurisdiction 5 cases
- 9.30.26Subject matter jurisdiction continued · venue 6 cases
- 10.2.26The Erie problem · pleading · responding to the complaint 16 cases
Midterm examination 10.7.26 · outline draft due 10.5.26
- 10.9.26The three testing motions
- 10.14 & 10.16.26Joinder, impleader, intervention and parties
- 10.19.26Discovery, including e-discovery · summary judgment begins
- 10.28 & 10.30.26Summary judgment finished
- 11.4 & 11.6.26Post-trial motions
- 11.9.26Res judicata and collateral estoppel
- 11.11.26Alternative dispute resolution
Reading the flowchart
What each location on the one-page chart actually compresses. Several boxes hide two separate inquiries, and two record citations have since gone stale.
| Chart location | What it actually means | Entries |
|---|---|---|
| Subject matter jurisdiction / personal jurisdiction / venue | Three distinct inquiries: authority over the type of case, authority over the defendant, and the proper geographic forum. | CP-02–08 |
| Complaint; clear factual statements | Supply a jurisdictional basis, a plausible claim for relief, and a demand; special pleading and party-capacity questions require separate attention. The chart's final rule number is not legible/present after “Rule.” | CP-09–11 |
| Rule 38 jury demand | Identify the right and demand it on time; demanding a jury does not create a right on every issue. | CP-12 |
| Verified complaints / affidavits for injunctive relief | The express affidavit-or-verified-complaint requirement concerns a TRO without notice. A noticed preliminary injunction needs an adequate evidentiary showing, but not invariably a verified complaint. | CP-13 |
| Service and due process | Compliance with the service rule and constitutionally adequate notice are related but separate. Actual awareness alone does not necessarily cure defective service. | CP-14 |
| No answer → default judgment | First check whether the defendant otherwise defended and whether its response is due. Entry of default and entry of default judgment are separate steps. | CP-15, 19 |
| Rule 12(b)(6); outside materials → Rule 56 | Conversion applies to Rule 12(b)(6) or 12(c) when outside materials are presented and not excluded, subject to recognized pleading-record exceptions. It does not automatically govern jurisdictional motions. | CP-16 |
| Answer; Rules 8(c), 9–13 | Admissions, denials, affirmative defenses, capacity objections, and counterclaims serve different functions. Rule 11 requires more than subjective good intentions in federal court. | CP-10–11, 17–21 |
| Joinder, class actions, interpleader | Each device has a different trigger; permission to join does not itself establish federal subject matter jurisdiction. | CP-20–26 |
| Discovery; Rules 26–37 | Discovery is selected according to the information needed. Interrogatories, production, examinations, admissions, and depositions are not mandatory sequential steps. | CP-27–40 |
| Rule 35: parties or agents | The rule reaches a party or a person in a party's custody or legal control. Employment or agency alone is not the test. | CP-36 |
| Summary judgment: no material facts in dispute | The question is whether a genuine dispute of material fact exists and whether the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Some facts can be disputed without requiring trial. | CP-41 |
| Trial: three burdens of proof | Identify the burden for each issue. Beyond a reasonable doubt is not the ordinary civil liability standard; its appearance in the chart should not make it a default civil option. | CP-43 |
| Rule 48: unanimous or MA 5/6 | Federal verdicts ordinarily must be unanimous absent stipulation. Massachusetts uses five-sixths; the chart's citation to G.L. c. 234, §34A is obsolete. Current authority is G.L. c. 234A, §68B. | CP-42 |
| Rule 49 “Jury Ints” | Read this as jury interrogatories, distinct from Rule 51 instructions. | CP-44–45 |
| Rule 50 before and after verdict | Separate the timely trial motion from a renewed post-trial motion and preserve its grounds. The mechanism concerns jury trials. | CP-46–48 |
| Judgment or dismissal | Determine finality, remaining claims, prejudice, post-trial relief, appeal, preclusion, and enforcement. | CP-49–55 |
The chapter containing the chart's Massachusetts jury citation was repealed in 2016. The five-sixths proposition survives in the successor statute; the old citation does not.
The changing question at each stage
The same dispute asks a different question at each stage, on different materials. The last column is the one to memorise: what surviving a stage does not establish.
| Stage | The question | Materials | What survival does not establish |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rule 12(b)(6) | Do the adequately pleaded facts plausibly state a legally recognized claim? | Complaint and permissible pleading record | That allegations are true or the plaintiff will prove them |
| Discovery | What nonprivileged information may be obtained through this device? | Requests, objections, declarations, protective-order record | That discoverable information is admissible or persuasive |
| Rule 56 | Could a reasonable factfinder find for the nonmovant on a material issue under the applicable burden? | Cited record materials capable of admissible presentation | That the nonmovant has won the disputed issue |
| Rule 50 | Is the trial evidence legally sufficient for a reasonable jury to find for the party on this issue? | Trial record, after a party is fully heard | That the judge may choose the more credible witness |
| Verdict / findings | Which facts are established under the applicable burden? | Admitted evidence and governing instructions | That every possible remedy follows automatically |
| Post-judgment review | Is the asserted error preserved and remediable through this motion or appeal? | Judgment, trial record, motion-specific materials | That disagreement with the result alone is a ground for relief |
Coverage map
The join between reading and practising. Every rule entry has a discussion task somewhere in the three laboratories; coverage is collective, because no single lawsuit naturally presents every procedural device.
| Entry | Laboratory stages | Navigation task |
|---|---|---|
| CP-01 | A1 / C1 | Identify commencement and compute the applicable procedural clock. |
| CP-02 | A1 / B1 / C1 | Identify the federal claim and concrete injury rather than assume jurisdiction. |
| CP-03 | A1 / B1 / C2 | Trace citizenship, measure the amount, and distinguish CAFA and interpleader thresholds. |
| CP-04 | A3 / B1 / C3 | Test the related claims and plaintiff-side statutory exclusions. |
| CP-05 | B1 | Compare removal grounds, amendment, consent, timing, and remand consequences. |
| CP-06 | A1 / C2 | Separate statutory reach, minimum contacts, and any consent theory. |
| CP-07 | A1 / C2 | Compare proper venue with transfer and contractual forum arguments. |
| CP-08 | A1 / C3 | Choose the procedural rule and governing substantive law independently. |
| CP-09 | A2 / C1 | Separate factual allegations, conclusions, and the relief demanded. |
| CP-10 | A1 / C3 | Identify the proper rights-holder, capacity, and special pleading triggers. |
| CP-11 | A2 / C1 | Explain the reasonable inquiry supporting a filing and any sanction route. |
| CP-12 | A2 / B2 / C5 | Demand a jury timely and classify the issues carrying that right. |
| CP-13 | B2 / C3 | Frame narrow interim relief, evidence of harm, notice, and security. |
| CP-14 | A2 / C2 | Identify a lawful service method and constitutionally sufficient notice. |
| CP-15 | A2 / C2 | Choose the response and preserve defenses subject to waiver. |
| CP-16 | A2 / A5 / C4 | Decide whether outside material should be excluded or trigger conversion. |
| CP-17 | A3 / C3 | Draft admissions, denials, and affirmative defenses with factual support. |
| CP-18 | A3 / B1 / C3 | Distinguish permission to amend, relation back, and jurisdictional effects. |
| CP-19 | A2 / B5 / C6 | Separate entry of default, judgment, notice, damages, and reopening. |
| CP-20 | A3 / C3 | Classify a proposed counterclaim and its jurisdictional basis. |
| CP-21 | A3 / C2 / C3 | Distinguish a co-party crossclaim from derivative third-party liability. |
| CP-22 | A1 / B3 / C3 | Test shared transactions and questions, then consider severance or separate trial. |
| CP-23 | A1 / C3 | Identify absent interests and distinguish necessary participation from convenience. |
| CP-24 | B3 / B6 | Analyze representation, common answers, class type, and settlement safeguards. |
| CP-25 | C2 | Analyze each fund independently under statutory or rule interpleader. |
| CP-26 | A3 / B3 / C3 | Identify an intervenor’s interest and the consequences of death or transfer. |
| CP-27 | A3 / B3 / B4 / C1 | Build a schedule responsive to preservation, privilege, and coordinated proceedings. |
| CP-28 | A4 / B4 / C4 | Narrow requests by relevance, proportionality, burden, and alternatives. |
| CP-29 | A4 / B4 / C4 | Separate facts, privileged communications, work product, and expert categories. |
| CP-30 | A4 / B4 / C4 | Choose focused party interrogatories and count discrete subparts. |
| CP-31 | A4 / B4 / C4 | Specify production categories and workable ESI formats. |
| CP-32 | A4 / C1 / C4 | Choose an individual or organizational deposition and define examination topics. |
| CP-33 | C1 | Explain why evidence must be perpetuated before an action can presently be brought. |
| CP-34 | A4 / C1 | Choose a qualified officer and identify permissible deposition stipulations. |
| CP-35 | A4 / C1 | Compare written questions with oral follow-up and later deposition use. |
| CP-36 | A4 / C4 | Identify the person, disputed condition, good cause, and examination scope. |
| CP-37 | A4 / C4 | Use admissions to narrow issues and address an unanswered request. |
| CP-38 | A4 / C4 | Direct nonparty discovery through a valid subpoena and consider compliance limits. |
| CP-39 | A4 / B4 / C4 | Connect the violation, prejudice, required process, and proposed sanction. |
| CP-40 | A4 / B4 / C4 | Identify lost ESI, preservation duty, restoration possibilities, prejudice, and intent. |
| CP-41 | A5 / B5 / C4 / C5 | Tie admissible proof to each element and applicable burden. |
| CP-42 | A6 / C5 | Identify jury size, permissible agreement, and required concurrence. |
| CP-43 | A5 / C5 | Distinguish persuasion burdens from procedural sufficiency standards. |
| CP-44 | A6 / B5 / C5 | Design verdict questions that expose legally material distinctions. |
| CP-45 | A6 / B5 / C5 | Propose accurate instructions and preserve a specific timely objection. |
| CP-46 | A6 / C5 | State the precise trial-evidence insufficiency after a party has been fully heard. |
| CP-47 | A6 / B6 / C6 | Match renewed grounds to preserved grounds and distinguish a purely legal issue. |
| CP-48 | A6 / C5B | Compare jury motions with bench findings and judgment on partial findings. |
| CP-49 | A6 / C6 | Identify unresolved claims and the need for a separate judgment or certification. |
| CP-50 | B6 / C6 | Specify the dismissal mechanism, prejudice, and effect on remaining claims. |
| CP-51 | A6 / C6 | Distinguish a new-trial request from alteration of the judgment and calculate timing. |
| CP-52 | A6 / C6 | Classify later evidence or notice problems under the proper relief ground. |
| CP-53 | A6 / B6 / C6 | Choose the review route, preserve issues, and identify the appeal trigger. |
| CP-54 | A6 / B6 / C6 | Analyze what was decided, against whom, and under the rendering court’s law. |
| CP-55 | A6 / C6 | Separate an appeal from a stay and identify available enforcement mechanisms. |
Working glossary
Distinctions this suite relies on. Each is a pair that produces a fluent, wrong answer when collapsed.
JurisdictionA court’s authority; distinguish subject matter from authority over a person.
VenueThe proper geographic court under the applicable statute; distinct from jurisdiction.
Claim / issueA demand for legal relief versus a particular factual or legal question within litigation.
Allegation / evidence / findingWhat a party asserts; material offered to prove it; what the factfinder determines.
Burden of production / persuasionEnough evidence to permit a finding versus the degree of conviction required for that finding.
Dismissal / summary judgment / JMOLDifferent stages, materials, and predicates; none is simply a generic “weak case” motion.
Joinder / jurisdictionA rule permitting participation does not itself supply subject-matter jurisdiction.
Intervention / impleader / interpleaderAn outsider seeks participation; a defendant asserts derivative liability; a stakeholder presents competing demands to a stake.
Class action / MDLRepresentative adjudication requires certification; centralized pretrial management does not itself create a class.
Privilege / work productProtection for qualifying confidential communications versus qualifying litigation preparation.
Default / default judgmentFailure recorded in the proceeding versus an adjudication granting relief; damages may still require proof.
Final / interlocutoryA decision ending the relevant judicial unit versus an intermediate ruling, subject to specific exceptions.
Claim / issue preclusionLimits on relitigating a claim versus an actually and necessarily decided issue.
PreservationKeeping evidence available or keeping an objection reviewable; identify which meaning applies.