Category Archives: Federal Practice
A court may strike affirmative defenses under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f) if they present an “insufficient defense, or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter.” The question is: can the Iqbal/Twombly pleading standards be applied to strike affirmative defenses in California … Continue reading
As in California state court, ex parte applications may be made in federal court. However, they are proper only in limited situations, such as ministerial matters (e.g., to file an oversized brief), scheduling matters (e.g., to shorten time or extend time … Continue reading
No. While naming “Does from 1 through 50, inclusive,” may be a common practice in California state court complaints, naming Doe defendants is generally not done in federal court. The naming of Doe defendants in federal question cases should be permissible when … Continue reading
Lost in state court? Under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, you don’t get second chances in federal court.
A litigant may lose in state court, whether at trial or on a motion to dismiss, and decide to give it a second try by refiling the case in federal court. Pro se litigants are more likely to seek second … Continue reading
In federal court, as in California state court, the affirmative defenses you list in your Answer will depend on an individualized analysis of the complaint and the facts of the case. Reference to treatises such as California Affirmative Defenses may … Continue reading