How should I use this Civil Procedure ranking page?

Use it to decide review order, not as a substitute for practice. Start with the first two or three topics, then reinforce them with timed multiple-choice work.

Does "most tested" mean the lower-ranked topics are unimportant?

No. It means the higher-ranked topics deserve earlier and more frequent review because they trigger more downstream issues and more repeat appearances across mixed sets.

Most tested

Most Tested MBE Civil Procedure Topics | BarPrepPlay

Civil Procedure punishes rushed ordering. Personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, Erie, removal, and preclusion stay near the top because they control entire answers.

Last reviewedMay 26, 2026Study formatTopic-ranking page

Overview

Civil Procedure punishes rushed ordering. Personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, Erie, removal, and preclusion stay near the top because they control entire answers.

1. Personal Jurisdiction

Very High frequency

GENERAL JURISDICTION: D "at home" in forum (domicile for individuals; state of incorporation or principal place of business for corporations). Can sue for ANY claim. SPECIFIC JURISDICTION: Claim arises from D's contacts with forum. Requirements: (1) Purposeful availment of forum's benefits; (2) Claim arises from or relates to contacts; (3) Reasonableness. MINIMUM CONTACTS: Must be intentional, not random/fortuitous. Stream of commerce: Split authority. CONSENT (forum selection clause, appearance without objection), WAIVER, and IN-STATE SERVICE also confer PJ. LONG-ARM STATUTES: Must authorize + satisfy due process.

HYPO: P (FL) sues D Corp (incorporated in DE, HQ in NY) in FL federal court. D Corp sold one product to P through D's website. Product malfunctioned and injured P. Does FL have personal jurisdiction? ANALYSIS: GENERAL JURISDICTION? D must be "at home" - only in DE (incorporation) or NY (principal place of business). Not FL. SPECIFIC JURISDICTION? (1) Purposeful availment - Did D purposefully direct activities at FL? One sale via website = close question. Did D target FL specifically or just have national website? (2) Claim arises from FL contact - Yes, injury from FL sale. (3) Reasonableness - Burden on D vs. P's interest. RESULT: Likely NO general jurisdiction. Specific jurisdiction depends on whether D specifically targeted FL market or just had passive website - courts split on internet jurisdiction.

Exam shortcut: General vs specific; minimum contacts

Section sources

28 U.S.C. Section 1332 International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945)Erie R.R. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938)

Premium content

Practice more in the app.

The ranked topic list, the top topic's rule summary and worked example, and the citations on this page are free. In the BarPrepPlay app, every practice question shows the correct answer and a written explanation once you answer. Free accounts get a sample, and Premium unlocks the full bank of about 1,000 MBE questions.

Create free account

Already have an account? Log in

Upgrade to Premium, $99

Primary law and source anchors

28 U.S.C. Section 1332 Federal diversity-jurisdiction statute for complete diversity and amount in controversy.
International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945) Minimum-contacts baseline for personal-jurisdiction analysis.
Erie R.R. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938) The core state-substantive/federal-procedural framework in diversity cases.

Study note

BarPrepPlay publishes these pages as supplemental study resources, not as an official NCBE or jurisdiction product. Use them to make your next practice session sharper, not to replace full-source reading.