Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Question 1

Subject Matter Jurisdiction - General

Answer 1

Fed. courts must have authority over the claim in question (as opposed to the parties or property, which is the concern of PJ); SMJ refers to the courts’ ability to exercise that authority

SMJ CANNOT BE WAIVED

State courts are presumed to have SMJ

Question 2

Subject Matter Jurisdiction - 4 Types

Answer 2

1) Diversity
2) Federal Question
3) Supplemental
4) Removal

Question 3

Diversity Jx - General

Answer 3

Fed courts have SMJ over controversies between citizens of different states, even where claims do not involve fed law

Question 4

Diversity Jx - 2 Requirements

Answer 4

1) Complete diversity: just between all P’s and D’s (same side of aisle doesn’t matter); Examined at the time of filing

2) Amount in controversy must exceed 75K: must be a good faith allegation that her claim exceeds 75K

Question 5

Diversity Exceptions

Answer 5

Fed courts will not hear actions involving divorce, alimony, child custody, or probate, even if diversity requirements are otherwise satisfied

Question 6

Citizenship for Complete Diversity - Natural Persons

Answer 6

Domicile (only have one); Where a person was last both 1) present and 2) intending to remain indefinitely

Question 7

Citizenship for Complete Diversity - Businesses (Corporation)

Answer 7

Citizens of every state where incorporated and where corp. maintains principal place of business (“nerve center”)

Question 8

Citizenship for Complete Diversity - Businesses (Unincorporated)

Answer 8

Citizens of all states in which any partner or manager is a citizen

Question 9

Amount in Controversy - General Rule

Answer 9

P’s complaint must make a good faith allegation that the amount of damages or injuryin controversy exceeds 75K excluding interest and costs

• Lenient Standard: to dismiss for insufficient amount, there must be no legal possibility that recovery will exceed 75K

Amount awarded is irrelevant

Question 10

Amount in Controversy - Equitable Relief Claims

Answer 10

Court looks at value of the harm caused

Question 11

Amount in Controversy - Aggregating Claim (Single P and D)

Answer 11

May be permissible; One P can aggregate all her claims against a single D

Question 12

Amount in Controversy - Aggregating Claims (Multiple Ps/Ds) - 2 Situations

Answer 12

Only allowed if either:

1) One P has joint liability claims against multiple Ds (use total value f the claim)

2) Multiple Ps seek to enforce a single title or right in which they have a common, undivided interest (rare)

• E.g. several Ps jointly own real estate and sue D to quiet title (undivided interest, so aggregation OK)

Question 13

Federal Question Jurisdiction - General

Answer 13

Fed courts have jx over properly-pleaded claims arising under fed law

• No diversity or amount in controversy requirements

Question 14

Federal Question Jurisdiction - Requirements

Answer 14

Claim must show a right or interest founded substantially on fed law (must appear on the face of the complaint; cannot be based on extraneous allegations of potential defenses)

Analysis: ask if P is enforcing a fed right (e.g. one that arises under fed. statute, regulation, Constitution, etc.)

Note: Beware of fact patterns in which complaint raises a fed. law or issue, but P is not enforcing a fed right

Question 15

Federal Question Jurisdiction - Exclusive Federal Jx Areas (4)

Answer 15

1) Bankruptcy
2) Patent, copyright, trademark
3) Federal Antitrust claims
4) Postal Matters

Question 16

Supplemental Jurisdiction - General

Answer 16

Supplemental jurisdiction allows a fed. court to hear additional claims (e.g. counterclaims and cross-claims) that do not, on their own, meet diversity or FQ) requirements

Question 17

Supplemental Jurisdiction - Requirements

Answer 17

Common nucleus of operative fact

• Each additional claim must share a CNOF with an existing claim that invoked FQ) or diversity jx

Same transaction of occurrence: Sup claims share a CNOF if they arise from the same transaction or occurrence as the underlying claim

Question 18

Supplemental Jurisdiction - Discretionary Refusal (3)

Answer 18

Court may refuse a sup claim if:

1) OG jx claims are dismissed early in the proceeding

2) Sup claim arises a novel or complex state law issue; or

3) Sup claim substantially predominates over of jx claims

Question 19

Supplemental Jurisdiction - Limitation

Answer 19

In div cases, P cannot use sup jurisdiction to overcome lack of diversity, but can use to overcome insufficient amount in controversy

Question 20

Removal Jurisdiction - General

Answer 20

D can remove a case originally filed in state court to fed court if the fed court would have had SMJ (i.e. div or FQ)

Question 21

Removal Jurisdiction - Rules (4)

Answer 21

1) Can only remove if the case could have been filed in fed. court

2) Only D can remove and all D’s must agree to removal

3) Can only remove to the fed district embracing the state court in which the case was originally filed

4) D who files a permissive counterclaim in state court waives the right to remove

Question 22

Removal Jurisdiction - Timing

Answer 22

D must remove within 30 days of service of the first removable document (usually service of process)

Question 23

Removal Jurisdiction - Procedure

Answer 23

D must file notice in state and fed courts

• Notice must contain grounds for removal and copies of documents served in state court; must be signed
• All adverse parties must receive notice of removal

Question 24

Removal Jurisdiction - Diversity Jx Limitations

Answer 24

D cannot remove if P filed suit in any D’s home state (i.e. no removal if any D is a citizen of the forum state)

Question 25

Removal Jurisdiction - Remand

Answer 25

If removal is improper; court can remand to state court

• Improper Procedure: P can move to remand within 30 days
• Lack of SMJ: P can move to remand at any time

Question 26

Erie Doctrine - General

Answer 26

In div cases, fed courts must apply state substantive law and fed procedural law; use the below analysis to determine if state or fed law applies (i.e. whether a state law is substantive)

Question 27

Erie Doctrine - Analysis

Answer 27

1) Is there a valid fed law that is on point and directly conflicts with state law (if yes, use federal law)?

2) If no fed law is on point, analyze under:

a) Outcome Determinative: WOuld applying or ignoring the state rule affect the outcome of the case? (if yes, state law is substantive and should be applied)

b) Balance of Interests: does either fed. or state system have a strong interest in applying the rule? (if one has clearly stronger interest, apply that law

c) Forum Shopping Avoidance: If fed court ignores state law, would it encourage litigants to flock to fed. court? (if yes, state law is substantive and should be applied)

Question 28

Erie Doctrine - 4 Things Always Governed by State Substantive Law

Answer 28

1) Elements of a claim or defense
2) Statute of Limitations
3) Conflict / Choice of Law Rules
4) Rules for tolling SOL