Right Court (PJ, SMJ, Venue) Flashcards
What does personal jurisdiction mean?
The power of the court** over the **parties
What does subject matter jurisdiction mean?
The power of court** over the **case
What are the bases upon which a court may assert subject matter jurisdiction?
Federal question
Diversity of Citizenship
What are the requirements for diversity of citizenship cases?
The case is either:
- between “citizens of different states”; or
- between a “citizen of a state and a citizen of a foreign country”
The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000
What does “citizens of different states” mean?
Complete diversity
- no plaintiff may be of the same citizenship as any defendant
How is citizenship determined?
Natural person
- if a U.S. citizen, citizenship is the state of her domicile
- 1) presence in state AND 2) intent to make it her permanent home
- determined at the point of filing the case
Corporation
- state where incorporated; AND/OR
- state where the corporation has its principal place of business–where the managers of the corporation direct, coordinate, and control the corporate activities (“nerve center”)
Unincorporated association (e.g., partnership, LLC)
- citizenship of all the members, including general and limited partners
Decedents, minor, or incompetents
- use the decedent’s, minor, or incompetent’s citizenship, NOT their representative
What are the requirements attendant the amount in controversy requirement?
Must exceed $75,000
- the amount claimed must be in good faith unless it is clear to a legal certainty that cannot recover more than $75,000
- if recovery is less than $75,000, plaintiff likely will have to pay the defendant’s costs
Aggregation
- a single plaintiff against a single defendant may satisfy the amount in controversy requirement by aggregating unrelated claims against the defendant
- may include multiple tortfeasors as long as they are jointly bound
- multiple plaintiffs may not aggregate claims
- with joint claims, the number of parties is irrelevant
Injunctive Relief
- plaintiff’s viewpoint–is plaintiff’s harm without the injunction in excess of $75,000; OR
- defendant’s viewpoint–does compliance with the injunction cost the defendant more than $75,000
What kinds of cases will federal courts refuse to hear?
Divorce, alimony, and/or child custody
Probating an estate
What are the requirements for a court to assert federal question jurisdiction?
The face of the complaint** must show a **right or interest founded substantially on a federal law
- “arising under jurisdiction”
- this is the statutory requirement; the constitutional requirement is that there must be merely a federal ingredient in the claim
What is the well-pleaded complaint rule?
The face of the plaintiff’s claim** itself must **arise** **under federal law
- inquire as to whether the plaintiff is enforcing a federal right
What if a plaintiff has additional claims to the original federal claim?
These additional claims must have an independent jurisdictional foundation to be heard before the the court:
- federal question jurisdiction
- diversity of citizenship jurisdiction
- supplemental jurisdiction
How may a plaintiff rely on supplemental jurisdiction to get an additional claim into federal court?
The additional claim and the federal claim must share a common nucleus of operative fact
- this requirement is always met by claims that arise from the same transaction or occurrence
NOTE: there is a_ limitation_ to this rule
- In a diversity case, the plaintiff cannot use supplemental jurisdiction to overcome a lack of diversity
- this is inapplicable to federal question cases or an insufficiency in amount in controversy
NOTE ALSO: the court has discretion to NOT hear the supplemental claim, looking for:
- the federal claim is dismissed early in the proceedings; or
- the state law claim is complex; or
- state law issues would predominate
What are the procedural requirements of removal?
Only the defendant** may remove the case **from state trial court to federal trial court
- must be within 30 days of service of the first paper that shows the case is removable
- all defendants served with process must consent to removal
- the 30 day time frame begins anew when a defendant is later served
If removal was improper**, the federal court can “**remand” to state court
Removal to the federal district embracing the state court where** the **case** was **filed
No time limit on raising a lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction for remand
What cases may be removed to federal court?
General Rule:
- any case** that meets the requirements for **diversity of citizenship** or **federal question
Limitations–applicable only if removing on the basis of diversity
- may not remove if any defendant is a citizen of the forum
- may not remove more than on year after the case was filed in state court
When a diversity case if before federal court, whose law applies?
A federal court in a diversity case** must apply **state substantive law. Ask:
A) is there a federal law** on point that **directly conflicts** with the **state law–if yes, then apply federal law
- Supremacy Clause
B) If no federal law on point, is it an easy case that has been decided as substantive state law (e.g., 1) elements of a claim or defense**; 2) **statute of limitations**; 3) **rules of tolling statutes of limitation**; 4) **conflict or choice of law rules)
C) If no to (A) and (B), then evaluate:
- outcome determinative–would applying or ignoring the state law rule affect the outcome of the case?
- relevance of the interests–does either federal or state system have a strong interest in having its rule applied?
- avoid forum shopping–if the federal court ignores state law, will it cause parties to flock to federal court
What is venue?
After determining whether a federal court may hear the case, venue tells us exactly which federal court.
Where is venue appropriate?
The plaintiff may lay venue in any district where:
- all the defendant’s reside; OR
- a substantial part of the claim arose
NOTE: where all the defendant’s are residents of the same state but reside in different districts of that state, venue is appropriate where any defendant resides
Where does a defendant reside for the purposes of venue?
Natural person: domicile
Corporation or unincorporated entity: where it is subject to personal jurisdiction for this case
May a court transfer the case to another federal court?
Yes, but it can only transfer the case to a district to where the case could have been filed**. The transferee court applies the **choice of law rules of the original court
If venue** was **proper**, this determination is in the **court’s discretion**. The court will consider the **convenience** for the **parties**, **convenience** for the **witnesses**, and **interests of justice:
- public factors: what law applies, what community should be burdened with jury service, keeping the local controversy in the local court
- private factors: convenience to the parties, the witnesses, and the evidence
If venue was improper, the court may
- transfer in the interests of justice; or
- dismiss
NOTE: all the parties may consent to venue being appropriate in a particular district and the court finds cause for the transfer of venue
Define forum non conveniens.
FNC applies where there is another court** in a **different judicial system** (foreign country) that is the **center of gravity** of the case, so much so that it makes **more sense for it to hold the case the present court. The court may:
- dismiss the case; or
- stay the case
What are the requirements for forum non conveniens?
The court will consider the same factors as for venue.
The court will consider the convenience for the parties, convenience for the witnesses, and the interests of justice:
- public factors: what law applies, what community should be burdened with jury service, keeping the local controversy in the local court
- private factors: convenience to the parties, the witnesses, and the evidence
- FNC dismissal is almost never granted if the plaintiff is a resident of the present forum
- the other court must be available and adequate (simply affording the plaintiff her day in court)
This must be a particularly strong showing because the results are so severe
