1) Subject Matter Jurisdiction Flashcards
4 kinds of smj
1) federal q
2) diversity
3) supplemental
4) removal
smj: source
congress
smj: def
power of fed court over case (fed courts have limited j. from const and fed statutes, vs. state courts = general j.)
fed question j: rule
fed courts empowered to hear claims presenting question of federal law
federal law: def
fed constitution, statutes/treaties, fed CL (rare)
fed q j: consider
1) well pleaded complaint rule
2) embedded claims (twinkie)
well pleaded complaint rule: rule
fed q j only works if the fed q arises w/in P’s affirmative claim (NOT D’s defenses. NOT just bc P mentions an argument involving federal law in her complaint–must be COA)
federal question embedded in state law claims: rule
fed question CAN involve state + fed law. It’s allowed if (factors)
fed q: embedded claims: factors
fed part is:
1) necessarily raised
2) actually disputed
3) substantial
4) capable of resolution in fed ct w/o disrupting fed-state balance
diversity j: rule
diversity action is claim
1) btwn citizens of different states (OR: US citizen + alien)
2) for amt in controversy over 75k
3) diversity must be complete
diversity j: timing of when citizenship measured
1) when complaint filed (so move doensn’t matter)
2) could arise later if cmplt amended to add/dismiss a party
diversity: complete diversity: exception
class actions: if class has 100+ ppl and amt in controversy $5M+, diversity only needs to be MINIMAL, not complete
diversity: class actions: minimal diversity (Def)
any single member of the class is diverse from any single D
diversity: citizenship rule: people
the state in which he
1) resides, and
2) intends to remain indefinitely
(can only be 1 at a time)
diversity: citizenship rule: people: wanderer rule
citizenship dn change until PLANTS ROOTS in new state by residing there + intending to remain indefinitely
diversity: citizenship rule: corporations
corporation is citizen of:
1) state(s) in which incorporated AND
2) state in which has “principal place of business”
diversity: citizenship rule: corporations: “principal place of business” def
place from which corp’s senior officers direct the activities of the corp (brains, NOT brawn)
diversity: citizenship rule: is it a…
1) person
2) corporation
3) unincorporated association
diversity: citizenship rule: unincorporated associations: def
if not a corp or person, then is unincorporated assn
diversity: citizenship rule: unincorporated associations: examples
unionsLLCs
partnerships
sole proprietorship
diversity: citizenship rule: unincorporated associations: rule
citizenship of an unincorporated assn = the citizenship of every member
diversity: citizenship rule: people: representatives: example
person has personal rep when:
minor
deceased
lacks capacity
diversity: citizenship rule: people: representatives: rule
citizenship of the INCAPACITATED PERSON controls, not the rep
diversity: amt in controversy: how much?
EXCEED $75k (75.01)
diversity: amt in controversy: how determine (rule)
1) court will defer to P’s allegation of her financial injury UNLESS it appears “to a legal certainty” that such allegations are incorrect
2) doesn’t matter how much P actually recovers as long as more than 75 k was pled at the outset IN GOOD FAITH
diversity: amt in controversy: aggregation
ok to aggregate multiple claims btwn same P and D (even if unrelated)
BUT can’t aggregate P’s claims against several Ds, or several Ps’ claims against same D
sup j: general rule
a supplemental claim can “piggyback” onto an anchor claim that has either fed q or div j
sup j: steps
1) related?
2) sneaky Ps? (diversity only)
3) state prerogatives
sup j: steps: 1) relatedness
sup claim must ARISE FROM THE SAME TRANSACTION OR OCCURRENCE as anchor claim
sup j: steps: 2) sneaky Ps
1) only consider if anchor claim is diversity j
2) if an ORIGINAL P is now making supplemental claim against a party brought in by joinder rules
sup j: sneaky Ps: situations where someone brought in by joinder rles
1) 3Ds
2) stacked Ds
sup j: steps: 3) state prerogatives (def)
court has DISCRETION to decide whether to take a case that might interfere w state’s traditional prerogative to decide state law.
sup j: steps: 3) state prerogatives: factors
(court's discretion always) does the sup caim have: 1) novel and complex issue of state law 2) substantially predominates over anchor claim? 3) court has dismissed anchor claim? 4) other compelling reasons
removal: who can do it?
Ds only, not Ps!
removal: rule
removal j. lets fed ct hear case orig filed in state court IF
case could have orig been filed in fed ct
removal: note
has to be P’s orig claims. Can’t decide based on counterclaims, cross claims, or impleader claims
(so even if D could have filed in fed ct if he had filed his claims first…can’t nec remove)
removal: exception
“home state D rule”:
D can’t remove case if:
1) fed j would only be based on diversity AND
2) D is a citizen of the state where P filed suit
removal: home state D rule: EXCEPTION
(E2E) dn apply in certain class actions
removal: multiple Ds (rule + exception)
removal only permitted if ALL Ds AGREE (except: certain class actions)
removal: timing: 2 rules
1) D must remove w/in 30 days of when grounds for removal became apparent
2) if based on diversity, must remove w/in 1 year of FILED (unless P attempted to thwart removal) (comes up when P changes claims/parties later)
removal: timing: “when grounds for removal became apparent” def
usu D being SERVED
could be later if P amends claim (dif parties, amt, etc)
removal: timing: multiple Ds
30 day window starts when LAST D served. But someone whose window is open has to file the notice (other Ds can still join it)
