SMJ and PJ

Question 1

What is SMJ?

Answer 1

Power of court over a particular case (4 ways to establish)

Question 2

What are the 4 ways to establish SMJ?

Answer 2

• Federal Question
• Diversity Jurisdiction
• Supplemental Jurisdiction
• Removal

Question 3

SMJ: What is Federal Question?

Answer 3

1) Federal question (FQ) –> A question of federal law must arise in P’s affirmative claim (this is the well-pleaded complaint rule)
a) Can have state law in addition to federal if the FQ is:
i) Actually in dispute +
ii) Demands federal judges’ expertise and ought to be resolved uniformly +
iii) Not so commonly present in state law actions to trample their jurisdiction

Question 4

SMJ: What is Diversity Jurisdiction?

Answer 4

Diversity jurisdiction –> Action between citizens of different states + amount in controversy is greater than $75k

a) Must be “complete” (no P and no D are citizens of same state)
b) Measured at time suit is filed, but amended complaints that add or dismiss can affect diversity
c) Exception: Class actions where more than 100 persons and $5M
i) Diversity need only be “minimal” – a single P diverse from a single D

Question 5

SMJ: How do you determine citizenship for Diversity jurisdiction?

Answer 5

i) Human beings = only a citizen of one place at a time. Citizen of state where resides and intends to remain indefinitely
ii) Corporations = could be citizen of 2 places. Citizen of state where incorporated and state in which it maintains its principal place of business (nerve center)
iii) Unincorporated associations (unions, LLCs, partnerships) = citizenship is the citizenship of every member. Could be all 50 states

Question 6

SMJ: Diversity Jurisdiction and Aggregation of Claims

Answer 6

If a P brings multiple claims against a single D, those will be added together to see if amount in controversy reached
i) Can be totally unrelated, no same transaction or occurrence requirement

Question 7

SMJ: What is Supplemental Jurisdiction?

Answer 7

Supplemental jurisdiction (SJ) –> Allows a claim falling outside federal question (FQ) or diversity jurisdiction to piggyback onto a claim that does fall within FQ or diversity

Question 8

SMJ: Supplemental Jurisdiction Step 1

Answer 8

Step 1: Determine relatedness

i) Does claim 2 (piggyback claim) arise from same transaction/occurrence as one with FQ or diversity (anchor claim)?
(1) If not, no supplemental. If so, advance to step 2

Question 9

SMJ: Supplemental Jurisdiction Step 2

Answer 9

Step 2: Sneaky plaintiffs

i) Is anchor claim FQ? If yes, advance to step 3
ii) If not, anchor must be diverse. Need to determine how they were brought into the suit. If brought into by P with:
(1) Rule 14, 19, 20, 24, P may be trying to slip it in. SJ not available for these claims. Need diversity or FQ for these
iii) If P did not do that (or if D brought in), advance to step 3
iv) Tip: Stacked parties (P gets beat up by D1, D2, D3) will always need FQ or diversity for all stacked parties if Ds are made parties by P from the outset

Question 10

SMJ: Supplemental Jurisdiction Step 3

Answer 10

Step 3: Steps 1 and 2 are satisfied, but is there a good reason for the court to decline anyway? If yes, court may decline. Possible reasons:

i) Involves novel or complex issue of state law;
ii) Claim “substantially dominates” over FQ or diversity;
iii) Anchor claim was dismissed;
iv) Other compelling reasons

Question 11

SMJ: Removal

Answer 11

Removal –> D can remove from state to fed court if case could have originally been filed in fed court

a) Exception: (Home-state defendant rule) D can’t remove if:
i) Fed jurisdiction would be grounded only in diversity jurisdiction +
ii) D is a citizen of state where P filed suit
b) If multiple Ds, removal only allowed if ALL Ds agree to remove

Question 12

SMJ: Removal Timing

Answer 12

Timing: D must remove within 30 days of when grounds become apparent

i) Normally, when D served w/ complaint, can be later: if P amends, then 30 days from that point
ii) Multiple Ds, later service on other Ds gives them, not D1, right to choose (but D1 can join later D’s removal)
iii) If removal based on diversity, D must remove within one year of filing unless P attempted to thwart removal

Question 13

Exam tip!

Answer 13

Keep in mind that federal SMJ will always concern whether a plaintiff may file a claim in the federal court system, or must instead seek relief in a different court system (such as in state court). Thus, SMJ has nothing to do with the geographic location of the lawsuit. Location only matters to questions of personal jurisdiction and venue.

Question 14

What is PJ?

Answer 14

Power of court over particular person

Question 15

PJ: Step 1

Answer 15

Step 1: Look at state law –> could a state court in that state assert PJ over that party?

a) Yes – federal court can assert PJ (subject to constitutional considerations)
b) No – if state court cannot, federal court cannot assert PJ either

Question 16

PJ: Step 2

Answer 16

Step 2: Look at 14th Amend –> State law must be constitutional under the Due Process Clause (DP) of the 14th Amend. State law constitutional if authorizes PJ in 1 of 5 circumstances:

1. residency
2. consent
3. service
4. minimum contacts
5. “at home” general jurisdiction

Question 17

PJ: Residency

Answer 17

Residency – If party is a resident (domiciled) of state where suit filed, PJ is constitutional
i) Corporation is a resident of state(s) where incorporated and where it has its principal place of business

Question 18

PJ: Consent

Answer 18

Party can consent to PJ (3 ways)

i) Appearance: Party appears in court without objecting to PJ (must object to PJ in initial filing or first appearance before court)
ii) Contract: If D Signed K with choice-of-forum clause = consent
iii) Appointment: Some states require businesses to appoint agents located in state to receive process = consent

Question 19

PJ: Service

Answer 19

D served with process while in state where suit filed (tag)
i) Not constitutional if P enticed or force D into the state OR D was in state to participate in a different legal proceeding

Question 20

PJ: Minimum Contacts

Answer 20

Minimum contacts – need all 3:

i) D has established a minimum contact with the forum state +
(1) Established if D causes harm in the state, does business, or has an interest in real property in the state
ii) Claim against D arises from that contact +
iii) PJ wont offend traditional notions of fair play + substantial justice

Question 21

PJ: “at home” general jurisdiction

Answer 21

very high bar to clear
i) For general jurisdiction, business must be so significant that the company, though not incorporated or headquartered in state, is essentially at home there (exceptional case)

Question 22

What is Venue?

Answer 22

Region within a particular state where suit can be brought

Question 23

How is Venue dictated?

Answer 23

Dictated by residency of D(s), location of events giving rise to the suit, or if and only if venue is not proper under the first two locations, where at least one D is subject to PJ (“gap filler”)

a) If all D’s reside in same state –> district where any single D resides
i) Humans reside where they live
ii) All other Ds (corp, partnership) reside in every district in which they are subject to PJ for that suit

b) Ds reside in multiple states –> location of harm
i) Defined as the district where a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred

Question 24

How do you transfer venue?

Answer 24

Transferring venue – Can move between federal courts, not state or foreign courts

a) Convenience (commonly used) – Could have been filed there in the first place + transfer is necessary for convenience of parties and/or witnesses
b) Agreement – If all parties join request to transfer, court does not need to consider PJ or venue (if agree, consenting)
c) Interest of justice – If filed in improper venue, court can dismiss or in the interest of justice, transfer where it could have been filed originally

Question 25

What is forum non conveniens?

Answer 25

Forum non conveniens – If most convenient forum is not in the US, court cannot transfer, but can dismiss without prejudice so that P can refile in proper country; may not be in US. Same factors considered as in transfer of venue

Question 26

The Complaint: What are in the contents?

Answer 26

a) Grounds for subject-matter jurisdiction
b) Statement of facts that are sufficient to show that P is entitled to relief
c) Demand for judgment and the relief sought

Question 27

The Complaint: Amendments (Rule 15)

Answer 27

a) Party can amend pleading ONCE as a matter of right:
i) Party can amend the complaint within 21 days of serving it or if an answer or motion to dismiss has already been filed, within 21 days after that service
ii) Party can amend an answer within 21 days of serving it

b) Party can amend with permission:
i) Permission of opposing parties, then can amend
ii) Permission of court - will consider reason for delay and prejudice (usually granted)

Question 28

The Complaint: Amendments and Statutes of Limitations

Answer 28

a) Adding new claims –> amendment considered filed on date of original claim IF new claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence as existing claim (relation back rule)
b) Adding new parties –> will relate back to original filing date if party to be added:
i) Knew of the suit soon enough to not be prejudiced and not later than time permitted for service, +
ii) Should have expected to be named as a D, +
iii) Was originally left out because of mistake in identity

Question 29

Diversity Jurisdiction: Erie

Answer 29

• In diversity cases, federal courts will apply both state and federal law. The court conducts an “Erie analysis” – 2 step process:

o Step 1: Do what Congress or the Constitution says if it is valid and on point.

o Step 2: If there is no federal statute or constitutional law on point, do what would avoid unfairness and forum shopping.

• If Step 2 instructs the court to apply state law, the law is called “substantive.”
• If Step 2 instructs the court to stick with ordinary federal practice, the practice is called “procedural.”

Question 30

Erie Tips

Answer 30

• Statutes of limitation are substantive.

* Choice of law rules are substantive.