Also known as: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure · FRCP · Fed. R. Civ. P.
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A body of procedural rules governing civil litigation in the federal district courts. The rules were adopted by the Supreme Court under authority delegated by Congress in the Rules Enabling Act and address pleading, pretrial practice, trial procedure, and judgment.
Felicia Fuentes, counsel for Fulton Shipping, produced a privileged email during discovery in a contract dispute. Upon realizing the error the next day, she immediately notified opposing counsel and demanded return of the document under the procedure in Rule 26(b)(5)(B). The court held that the prompt steps preserved the privilege.
Flora Ford, a citizen of State A, sued Freeman Engineering, a State B corporation, in federal court on diversity grounds. State law required personal service on an executor, but Ford served the defendant by leaving papers with a resident of suitable age under the federal rule. The court upheld service because the federal rule applied.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Frank Fisher, defendant in a state-court tort action, filed a notice of removal in the federal district court for the district where the state action was pending. The notice contained a short statement of grounds, was signed under Rule 11, and included copies of all served process and pleadings.
Fiona Foster and other pharmacies filed a diversity class action against Fidelity Trust seeking statutory interest on late payments. A state statute barred class actions for such claims, but the court applied Rule 23 to decide certification because the federal rule controlled.
Forrest Falconer sued Falcon Dynamics in federal court. The action was dismissed for failure to prosecute. When Falconer refiled the same claim in state court, the defendant argued claim preclusion. The court looked to state law rather than Rule 41(b) to determine whether the dismissal counted as an adjudication on the merits.
Fatou Fall filed a complaint alleging an antitrust conspiracy among telecommunications firms based on parallel conduct and general assertions of agreement. The defendants moved to dismiss. The court applied the plausibility standard and dismissed the complaint for lack of factual enhancement showing an actual agreement.
A valid Federal Rule of Civil Procedure that directly addresses an issue governs in diversity actions if the rule is arguably procedural and does not abridge, enlarge, or modify substantive rights under the Rules Enabling Act. Courts first determine whether the federal rule is on point before turning to Erie analysis.
When a court denies a motion to dismiss, the responsive pleading must be served within fourteen days after notice of the denial under Rule 12(a)(4)(A). Failure to meet this deadline can result in entry of default.
A notice of removal must be signed pursuant to Rule 11, contain a short and plain statement of the grounds for removal, and include copies of all process, pleadings, and orders served on the defendant.
Yes. Rule 23 is a valid procedural rule that governs whether an action may proceed as a class action in federal court and displaces conflicting state statutes that limit representative suits.
…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…