{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Civ Pro-Waggoner- Spring 2006- Bill Everett

Civ Pro-Waggoner- Spring 2006- Bill Everett - Civil...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Civil Procedure- Waggoner- Spring 2006 I. Subject Matter Jurisdiction A. Federal Question 1. Claims arising under federal statutes, Constitution, or fed. common law – Judicial Code Sec. 1331 a) Well-pleaded complaint- plaintiff’s cause of action must be based on fed. i) Defense based on federal law is not enough ii) Must be cause of action under federal statute to qualify (a) If statute was passed after 1976 and does not specify private right of action- there is no private right of action. b) Grable v. Darue- inquiry into the importance of the federal issue in the case and the impact on federal court case loads and federal/state division of jurisdiction- substituted for well-pleaded complaint. c) A consent decree from federal judge would be federal matter- private settlement would be a contract- not a federal matter. 2. Bankruptcy and Patent law a) Exclusive Federal jurisdiction 3. Securities, Civil Rights a) Concurrent jurisdiction with state courts. B. Diversity- 4. Complete Diversity- 28 USC 1332 a) Matter in controversy must exceed $75000 i) allegations in pleadings usually considered controlling. ii) Injunctions can be valued different ways (a) Value of injunction to plaintiff (b) Cost to def. of complying with injunction (c) Cost to party invoking jurisdiction (d) All of the above iii) Could include full range of judgments… Possible payment from A to B plus possible payment from B to A.???? iv) Each plaintiff must meet amount in controversy- unless plaintiffs have common undivided interest in claim. v) Claims against multiple defendants can be combined if they have a common undivided interest vi) Multiple claims against single defendant can be combined. vii)New parties who do not meet amount in controversy can added if it is the same constitutional case? ExxonMobil v. Allapattah. b) Cannot have citizens of same state on both sides of lawsuit- 1332(a)(1) c) Cannot have foreign citizens on both sides of lawsuit unless there are also citizens of diverse states on both sides of lawsuit – 1332(a)(3) 5. Minimal Diversity- required by US Constitution 1
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
a) Must have at least one diverse party on opposite side of suit b) Allowed by specific Fed. statutes- i) Interpleader- 28 USC 1335 ii) Class actions 28 USC 1332(d) iii) Remove 28 USC 1453 iv) Mass Torts 28 USC 1369 v) 28 USC 1441(e)- mass accident-removal 6. Citizenship of parties a) State citizenship is defined by where the person resides. i) Domicile- physical residence and intent to remain there indefinitely. ii) Citizenship is defined by status at time action is filed. iii) Legal representative of decedent, infant, or incompetent is deemed to be citizen of state of decedent, infant, or incompetent. 1332(c)(2) b) Corporations are defined as having citizenship of state of incorporation and of principal place of business. 1332(c)(1) i) Stating that corporation does not have principal place of business in current state can be enough to establish diversity.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 11

Civ Pro-Waggoner- Spring 2006- Bill Everett - Civil...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon bookmark
Ask a homework question - tutors are online