Knowledge

Doctrines of civil procedure

Source đź“ť

123: 519: 22: 356: 408:
have developed to comprehensively deal with certain common issues that arise when a person is involved in bringing, or contemplating bringing a civil lawsuit.
349: 420:, (however they are sometimes referred to under names other than 'Doctrines of Civil Procedure'), although often they have much less importance. 342: 39: 86: 58: 65: 309: 130: 72: 328: 187: 54: 560: 232: 105: 281: 43: 207: 79: 319: 198: 432: 534: 267: 222: 579: 177: 32: 553: 212: 243: 217: 401: 227: 122: 8: 314: 304: 299: 260: 584: 172: 546: 424: 152: 468: 448: 428: 134: 492: 530: 436: 157: 142: 573: 291: 417: 381: 253: 439:
code', and have therefore largely replaced any pre-existing doctrines.
518: 388:
rules and codes, define the steps that a person involved in a civil
21: 405: 373: 167: 162: 389: 385: 377: 526: 435:, which according to Part 1 of those rules are a 'new 46:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. 571: 554: 350: 561: 547: 357: 343: 106:Learn how and when to remove this message 469:"Rule 64. Seizing a Person or Property" 572: 411: 329:Adequate and independent state ground 513: 44:adding citations to reliable sources 15: 13: 14: 596: 497:LII / Legal Information Institute 473:LII / Legal Information Institute 416:Similar doctrines exist In other 234:Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 517: 376:as opposed to being set down in 121: 20: 31:needs additional citations for 485: 461: 55:"Doctrines of civil procedure" 1: 454: 533:. You can help Knowledge by 7: 442: 10: 601: 512: 433:Civil Procedure Rules 1998 395: 370:Civil procedure doctrines 178:Constitutional avoidance 392:can (or can not) take. 384:, which, together with 372:are rules developed by 529:-related article is a 400:In the United States 218:Amount in controversy 131:United States federal 402:federal jurisdiction 40:improve this article 412:Other jurisdictions 305:Anti-Injunction Act 173:Political questions 431:is covered by the 310:Sovereign immunity 542: 541: 425:England and Wales 367: 366: 276: 275: 153:Advisory opinions 116: 115: 108: 90: 592: 563: 556: 549: 521: 514: 507: 506: 504: 503: 489: 483: 482: 480: 479: 465: 423:For example, in 359: 352: 345: 235: 208:Federal question 195: 194: 125: 118: 117: 111: 104: 100: 97: 91: 89: 48: 24: 16: 600: 599: 595: 594: 593: 591: 590: 589: 580:Civil procedure 570: 569: 568: 567: 511: 510: 501: 499: 493:"Erie doctrine" 491: 490: 486: 477: 475: 467: 466: 462: 457: 449:Civil procedure 445: 429:civil procedure 414: 398: 363: 334: 331: 233: 182: 135:civil procedure 133: 112: 101: 95: 92: 49: 47: 37: 25: 12: 11: 5: 598: 588: 587: 582: 566: 565: 558: 551: 543: 540: 539: 522: 509: 508: 484: 459: 458: 456: 453: 452: 451: 444: 441: 413: 410: 397: 394: 365: 364: 362: 361: 354: 347: 339: 336: 335: 333: 332: 327: 325: 321:Rooker–Feldman 317: 312: 307: 302: 297: 288: 285: 284: 278: 277: 274: 273: 272: 271: 264: 257: 247: 246: 240: 239: 238: 237: 230: 225: 220: 215: 210: 202: 201: 199:Subject-matter 191: 190: 184: 183: 181: 180: 175: 170: 165: 160: 155: 149: 146: 145: 143:Justiciability 139: 138: 127: 126: 114: 113: 28: 26: 19: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 597: 586: 583: 581: 578: 577: 575: 564: 559: 557: 552: 550: 545: 544: 538: 536: 532: 528: 523: 520: 516: 515: 498: 494: 488: 474: 470: 464: 460: 450: 447: 446: 440: 438: 434: 430: 426: 421: 419: 418:jurisdictions 409: 407: 403: 393: 391: 387: 383: 379: 375: 371: 360: 355: 353: 348: 346: 341: 340: 338: 337: 330: 326: 324: 322: 318: 316: 313: 311: 308: 306: 303: 301: 298: 296: 294: 290: 289: 287: 286: 283: 280: 279: 270: 269: 265: 263: 262: 258: 256: 255: 251: 250: 249: 248: 245: 242: 241: 236: 231: 229: 226: 224: 221: 219: 216: 214: 211: 209: 206: 205: 204: 203: 200: 197: 196: 193: 192: 189: 186: 185: 179: 176: 174: 171: 169: 166: 164: 161: 159: 156: 154: 151: 150: 148: 147: 144: 141: 140: 136: 132: 129: 128: 124: 120: 119: 110: 107: 99: 88: 85: 81: 78: 74: 71: 67: 64: 60: 57: â€“  56: 52: 51:Find sources: 45: 41: 35: 34: 29:This article 27: 23: 18: 17: 535:expanding it 524: 500:. Retrieved 496: 487: 476:. Retrieved 472: 463: 422: 415: 399: 369: 368: 320: 292: 268:Quasi in rem 266: 259: 252: 223:Supplemental 188:Jurisdiction 102: 93: 83: 76: 69: 62: 50: 38:Please help 33:verification 30: 382:legislation 254:In personam 574:Categories 502:2024-04-28 478:2024-04-28 455:References 437:procedural 315:Abrogation 300:Abstention 282:Federalism 96:April 2024 66:newspapers 585:Law stubs 406:doctrines 213:Diversity 137:doctrines 443:See also 404:, these 374:case law 323:doctrine 295:doctrine 244:Personal 168:Mootness 163:Ripeness 158:Standing 396:Purpose 390:lawsuit 228:Removal 80:scholar 427:, all 261:In rem 82:  75:  68:  61:  53:  525:This 386:court 378:codes 87:JSTOR 73:books 531:stub 293:Erie 59:news 527:law 380:or 42:by 576:: 495:. 471:. 562:e 555:t 548:v 537:. 505:. 481:. 358:e 351:t 344:v 109:) 103:( 98:) 94:( 84:· 77:· 70:· 63:· 36:.

Index


verification
improve this article
adding citations to reliable sources
"Doctrines of civil procedure"
news
newspapers
books
scholar
JSTOR
Learn how and when to remove this message
Seal of the United States Supreme Court
United States federal
civil procedure
Justiciability
Advisory opinions
Standing
Ripeness
Mootness
Political questions
Constitutional avoidance
Jurisdiction
Subject-matter
Federal question
Diversity
Amount in controversy
Supplemental
Removal
Class Action Fairness Act of 2005
Personal

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑