Civ Pro Must Knows Flashcards
Claims that can be aggregated for diversity jx amount in controversy
- One P v. One D - aggregation allowed
- One P v. Multiple D - aggregation not allowed unless Ds are jointly liable
- Multiple Ps v. One D - aggregation between Ps not allowed unless Ps are enforcing common or undivided interest (agg allowed for one P’s multiple claims against one D).
Diversity Jx requirements and things to remember
(1) the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and (2) there is diverse citizenship between the opposing parties.* ** ***
- determined on date complaint filed (substitution of party not considered)
**between (a) US citizens domiciled in different states; (b) US citizens domiciled in US v. Foreign citizens; (c) US citizens domiciled in different states and foreign citizens are additional parties; (d) US citizens and permanent residents domiciled in different states… NO diversity: foreign v. foreign (even if there’s a US citizen involved, even if not, even if diff countries)
*** Citizenship for diversity jx: person = domicile; corporation = incorp or principal place; Unincorp assn = citizen of every state where members are domiciled
SMJ in Class Actions
- Federal Question
- Diversity (any named P’s claim exceeds $75k (bc supplemental jx over others); and named opposing parties are citizens of different states)
- CAFA: (1) class contains 100 members, (2) at least one class member and one D are diverse, (3) amount in controversy for aggregated claims EXCEEDS $5 million
Removal
- D can remove suit from state to federal court if case falls within fed ct’s original SMJ
- All Ds must consent 30 days of service or amended complaint
- Notice must be filed in fed ct; copy delivered to parties & state court
- Removal must be to dist ct for district in which state ct action is pending
(1) If Fed Q Jx
- Fed Q has to be on face of well pleaded complaint (removal can’t be based on fed defense alone)
(2) If diversity Jx
- removal is prohibited when SMJ arises solely from diversity jx AND D is a citizen of the forum state
- Must remove within one year of the commencement of the action
in state court, unless the plaintiff acted in bad faith (like joins nondiverse D, waits a year, then dismisses non-diverse D, just to defeat diversity)
Personal Jx
Personal jurisdiction refers to a court’s authority over the parties or property in the action before it.
A federal court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction must comport with due process. This constitutional requirement is generally satisfied through the minimum-contacts test, which requires that:
the plaintiff’s claim arise from or be closely related to the defendant’s minimum contacts with the forum state
and
the exercise of jurisdiction comply with notions of fair play and substantial justice.
Minimum contacts:
1. purposeful availment (purposeful and substantial contact)
2. foreseeability (reasonably anticipate being sued in the forum state)
3. Relatedness (specific v. general - if general, domicile or continuous and systematic contacts?)
Fair play and substantial justice:
1. Interest of forum state
2. Burden on D to appear
3. Interest in judicial efficiency
4. Shared interest of the states in promoting common policy
a response to the amended pleading (e.g., answer) generally must be made by
the later of the following deadlines:
- The time remaining to respond to the original pleading—e.g., an answer is generally due within 21 days after service of process
- 14 days after the service of the amended pleading
However, the court may shorten or extend these deadlines, and the response must be made according to the court-ordered deadline.
Supplemental jx
when only some claims fall within the court’s original subject-matter jurisdiction, the court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining claims. This is generally permitted when a supplemental claim and an original claim are so related that they form part of the same case or controversy.
FED Q JX
- Works as long as claims constitute the same case or controversy
DIVERSITY JX
when original claim is based solely on diversity jurisdiction, supplemental jx is not permitted if a supplemental claim:
- would destroy diversity of citizenship or
- seeks $75,000 or less and is made by a plaintiff (1) against parties added through joinder, intervention, or impleader or (2) seeking to join through compulsory joinder or intervention.*
*Practically, this means Ds can bring supp claims with common nucleus of operative fact test; Ps can only bring supp claims if it’s multiple Ps against 1 D, claims are related, and one P satisfies the AIC.
NOTE: supplementary jx is discretionary. district court has discretion to decline to exercise supplemental jx over a claim that would otherwise qualify for supplemental jurisdiction in each of the following circumstances:
i) The supplemental claim raises a novel or complex issue of state law;
ii) The supplemental claim substantially predominates over the claims within original federal jurisdiction;
iii) All of the claims within the court’s original jurisdiction have been dismissed; or
iv) In exceptional circumstances, if there are other compelling reasons for declining jurisdiction.
Does a counterclaim in a diversity action have to meet the
jurisdictional minimum of $75,000.01?
What about crossclaim?
Generally no if the counterclaim is compulsory (arises out of same transaction or occurrence as opposing party’s claim).
Yes if it’s a permissive counterclaim (doesn’t arise out of same trans/occur). Permissive CC can only be heard by fed diversity ct only if it independently satisfies diversity jx
If D bringing - yes if related claims
If P bringing - probably not. supp jx precluded for claims by existing Ps against persons made parties under rules for impleader, compulsory joinder, permissive joinder, intervention | by persons to be joined as Ps pursuant by compulsory joinder | by persons seeking to intervene as Ps under intervention
No minimum contacts - alternative sources of PJx
Nationwide personal jurisdiction: Federal statute authorizes nationwide service of process—eg, statutory interpleader
100-mile bulge rule: (1) Party added to suit through impleader or required joinder AND (2) Party served with process within 100 miles of federal court where suit is pending
Federal claim, no state-court jurisdiction: (1) Plaintiff’s claim arises from federal law; (2) Defendant is not subject to PJx in any state; AND (3) Exercise of jx complies with U.S. Cons & federal laws—ie, defendant has minimum contacts with United States [typically used for non-U.S. residents who have contacts with US generally but not particular state]
Service methods
Process can be served by (1) following the rules of the state where the court is located or where service is made, (2) delivering the summons and complaint to the defendant personally (or to his/her authorized agent), or (3) leaving the summons and complaint at the defendant’s dwelling with a resident of suitable age and discretion.
