Supplemental Jurisdiction

Question 1

Joinder

Answer 1

A plaintiff may join together multiple claims against a single defendant.

A plaintiff may join together in one case claims against multiple defendants.

More than one plaintiff can join together to bring claims against a single or multiple defendants.

Question 2

Supplemental Jurisdiction

Answer 2

When the federal court has subject matter jurisdiction over one or more of these claims, will we also allow SMJ over the claims that don’t have their own independent basis for SMJ.

This is “supplemental” jurisdiction: it wouldn’t exist except that the additional claim is related to the one for which there is SMJ.

It is constitutional because Article III allows more SMJ than 1331 and 1332.

The rule for when supplemental jurisdiction exists is set forth in 1367.

Question 3

§ 1367 a

Answer 3

(a) . . . in any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction, they shall have supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy under Art. III . . . [including] claims that involve the joinder or intervention of additional parties.

Question 4

§ 1367 b

Answer 4

(b) When jurisdiction is based solely on 1332, NO supplemental jurisdiction over claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule 14, 19, 20 or 24, or over claims by persons proposed to be joined as plaintiffs under Rule 19, or seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24 . . .

Question 5

§1367 c

Answer 5

(c) The district courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a claim under (a) if –

the claim raises a novel or complex issue of State law

the claim substantially predominates over the claim or claims over which the court has original jurisdiction

the district court has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction, or

in exception circumstances, there are other compelling reasons for declining jurisdiction

Question 6

1367 outline

Answer 6

1. Is there original jurisdiction over any claim?
   Federal Q? Diversity?
2. If yes, is there supplemental j over the additional claim(s) for which there is no original SMJ –
   a. Part of the “same case or controversy”?
   - If not, no supp jurisdiction.
   b. If yes, is original j based solely on diversity?
   - If original j based on federal ?, supp juris exists.
   - If no federal ?, no SJ over a claim by plaintiff against additional party D, or by an additional P.
3. If supp j exists, court may decline to exercise it if claim raises novel or complex state law issue, predominates over original claims, will be the only claim left, or there are other exceptional circumstances.