EXAM#___________________
Prof. Ramo: Civil Procedure I, Final, Fall 2011 Page 12 of 14
Part II: Essay Question
Recommended Time: 1 hour
Maria James is a dedicated political activist and a lifelong resident in Oakland,
California. When she heard about the protest called “Occupy Oakland” assembling in
tents in a park next to Oakland City Hall in California, she went to the park to participate.
She found the protesters and soon joined a group who had a large tent and were
producing protest signs.
One night the Oakland police decided to move the protesters out of the park. As Maria
was trying her best to leave peaceably, one of the Oakland police offers hit her with a
baton and another Oakland police officer fired a rubber bullet at her causing her to
stumble and hit her head. She suffered a concussion and debilitating headaches. As a
result, she had to leave work and be taken care of by her parents who now live in Seattle
Washington.
At her parents’ urging, Maria consults with a Seattle attorney who specializes in civil
rights cases. She is angry about the way she was treated. She believes her first
amendment constitutional right to peaceably assemble was violated.
The attorney suggests she sue Oakland and she should sue in Seattle while she is
recuperating to avoid Oakland courts that might favor the City and police. He has found
that the Oakland police regularly train for riots at a special police school in Seattle. And
as luck would have it, the Oakland Mayor, who under California and Washington law is
the City’s agent for service of process, is coming to visit the school next week.
Maria sues Oakland in Washington state court for violation of her federal civil rights (the
federal civil rights act allows suits in state or federal court) and serves the Mayor in
Seattle. The complaint also includes related state law claims for battery and intentional
infliction of emotional distress. Oakland within 30 days files a removal notice to Seattle
Federal District Court. Maria timely moves to remand the state claims back to state
court. The court denies the remand, saying the federal claim’s essence requires a
determination of whether she had the right under the constitution to assemble at the park
and if not, whether police used unnecessary force. The judge says these are federal
issues, which predominate.
Oakland then files a motion to dismiss, arguing that there is no general or specific
personal jurisdiction over Oakland in Washington. The federal judge denies the motion.
Oakland then files a new motion arguing improper venue, or in the alternative, change of
venue requiring the Court to dismiss or transfer the case to San Francisco Federal Court
(Oakland Division). Cities under federal and state law only reside where the City is
located. Plaintiff opposes the motion. The court determines that venue is improper and
that transfer would be appropriate and orders the entire case transferred to San Francisco
Federal Court. [EXAM CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE]
