Also known as:FRCP · Federal Rules of Civil Procedure · Fed.R.Civ.P.
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An official compilation of procedural rules promulgated by the Supreme Court under the Rules Enabling Act that regulate the conduct of civil actions in United States district courts from commencement through final judgment and appeal.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Removal Filing Requirements
Fernando Farrell sued Fisher Foods in state court for breach of a supply contract. Fisher Foods decided to remove the case to federal court on diversity grounds. Its counsel prepared and filed a notice of removal in the appropriate district court along with copies of the state court summons and complaint. The notice contained a short statement identifying diversity as the basis for removal and was signed in compliance with Rule 11.
Service of Process Validity
Faith Fitzgerald filed a diversity action against Foster Forge in federal court. She arranged for an adult nonparty to deliver the summons and complaint to the company's registered agent. Foster Forge moved to dismiss claiming the service method violated state rules. The court denied the motion because the federal rules controlled the method of service.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Statutes
Federal Rules
Restatements
Dictionaries
Hanna v. Plumer380 U.S. 460 (1965)
Work Product Protection Scope
Finn Fletcher's company faced an IRS summons seeking internal investigation documents prepared by outside counsel. The company withheld the materials claiming work product protection. The court upheld the protection because the documents were prepared in anticipation of litigation and reflected counsel's legal analysis.
Upjohn Co. v. United States449 U.S. 383, 389 (1981)
Standing Injury Requirement
Felicia Fuentes and other environmental advocates sued a federal agency over regulatory changes they claimed would harm endangered species abroad. The plaintiffs alleged only a general interest in wildlife preservation. The court dismissed the action for lack of standing because no plaintiff showed a concrete and particularized injury.
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife504 U.S. 555 (1992)
Pleading Sufficiency Standard
Frank Fisher filed an antitrust complaint alleging parallel pricing by several telecommunications firms. The complaint contained only conclusory assertions of an agreement without factual support. The court dismissed the action because the allegations failed to state a plausible claim for relief under the federal pleading standard.
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly550 U.S. 544, 556, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L. Ed. 2d 929 (2007)
Federal Common Law Authority
Felix Franco's union sued Lincoln Mills for breach of a collective bargaining agreement in federal court. The defendant argued that state contract law should govern the dispute. The court held that federal common law developed under the federal rules supplies the governing principles for enforcement of such agreements.
Textile Workers Union of Am. v. Lincoln Mills of Ala.353 U.S. 448 (1957)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
3
When does a valid federal rule displace a conflicting state procedural rule in a diversity case?+
A federal rule controls if it is on point and was validly promulgated under the Rules Enabling Act. The rule regulates procedure rather than substantive rights. State law applies only when no federal rule directly addresses the issue.
Supporting sources
What must a defendant include in a notice of removal under the governing statute?+
The notice must be signed under Rule 11 and contain a short and plain statement of the grounds for removal. It must also include copies of all process, pleadings, and orders served in the state action.
Supporting sources
How do the federal rules allocate responsibility for objecting to jury instructions?+
A party must file written requests for instructions at a reasonable time and object on the record before the instructions are given. Failure to object properly waives the claim of error on appeal.
Supporting sources
380 U.S. 460 (1965)Conflict of Laws
…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…