Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
34 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What is required for federal J to exist?
|
1. U.S. Constitution must authorize AND
2. some federal statute must grant Jurisdiction |
|
|
The primary grants of Federal SMJ are:
|
1. Diversity of Citizenship
2. Federal Question 3. Cases in which U.S. is a party |
|
|
What are important secondary grants of federal J?
|
1. Supplemental J
2. Removal J |
|
|
What is the complete diversity rule?
|
No P is a citizen of the same state as ANY D
AND the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000 |
|
|
How is citizenship determined?
|
1. physical presence
2. intent-where you intend to return when you are away |
|
|
How is the citizenship of a corporation determined?
|
1. the state of incorporation
(does not require physical presence) 2. the state where they have their principal place of business |
|
|
How is the citizenship of Partnerships, Unicorporated associations and other entities determined?
|
these entities are citizens of each state of which the partners are a citizen
|
|
|
Does the amount in controversy require proof?
|
No, but a good faith allegation that claim exceeds 75k excluding interest and costs
|
|
|
Can claims be aggregated to reach $75k?
|
depends
Claims between same 2 parties-yes Claims ag different D-no (unless they are asserting a single undivided interest (rare) |
|
|
How does the court value injunctions for federal amount in controversy requirement?
|
Majority-value to the P
Minority-cost to D ie: Does the pollution of a stream decrease the value of P's land or what would it cost D to comply with injunction? |
|
|
What matters are excluded from federal courts even if amount in controversy is met?
|
actions to determine:
marital status child custody or probate a decedent's estate |
|
|
What is federal question Jurisdiction?
|
Federal courts may hear claims when the action arises "under the construction, laws or treaties of the U.S."
regardless of P's citizenship the CoA must be a claim or right created by federal law |
|
|
Is there federal J if there is more than one claim?
|
The federal court must have SMJ over EVERY claim asserted. if one claim is within federal SMJ and one is not, then look to supplemental J
|
|
|
What is Supplemental Jurisdiction?
|
allows federal ct. to entertain claims over which it would not have an independent basis of SMJ
|
|
|
What is the basic rule of Federal Supplemental J?
|
Do the claims arise from a common nucleus of operative facts? (same occurrence or factual event)
|
|
|
What is the test for "same case or controversy?"
|
Do the claims arise from a common nucleus of operative facts (same transaction or factual event)?
|
|
|
Exception to Supplemental J: When is there no supplemental J even if the claims arise from the same transaction or factual event?
|
If Claim A is in F Ct solely on diverity J (not federal ?) AND
Claim B is a claim by the P against parties other than the diverse D (additional parties joined under FRCP 4, 19, 20, 24 AND Assertion of Claim B would be inconsistent with complete diversity and amount in controversy requirements of diversity statute. |
|
|
HYPO: L(NY) sues O (CA) in fed ct on a state law k claim. L wants to add in the same action a related state law k claim agaisnt C (NY). Fed SMJ? no-claim against O can get in on diversity. Claim against C can't
|
1. it is only in fed ct on diversity.
2. it is brought by P 3. against other than the original D and 4. it is inconcistent with complete diversity so NO fed SMJ |
|
|
More on Supplemental Jurisdiction:If P brings the 2nd claim, the first claim must be on federal question.
|
Hypo: P brings suit against VA hospital under Federal Tort Claims Act and negligence claim against doc for med malpractice. Doc's claim can only get in by supplemental J because the VA claim is a fed ?
|
|
|
May supplemental J exist by anyone other than parties? (joinder)
|
Yes, if the claim is related to any claim within the fed ct SMJ
the original claim gets in on diversity. |
|
|
What is Removal J of Fed Ct?
|
allows D (only) to have case filed in state court "removed" to the fed ct encompassing the state ct where originally filed.
P who files in state court can't remove when D counterclaims |
|
|
What is the test for removal?
|
Could the case have been maintained in Fed Ct initially? Is there diversity and amount in controversy OR a federal question?
|
|
|
What is the removal exception for diversity cases?
|
There is no removal J if any D is a citizen of the state from which removal is sought.
|
|
|
what is the time limit for removal?
|
Diversity cases cant' be removed more than one year after the case was filed in state court
|
|
|
What is the procedure for removal?
|
D files notice or removal in fed ct. stating
1. grounds for removal 2. signed under Rule 11 3. attaching all documents served on D in state action when it is filed, it becomes a federal action and the state no longer has J. |
|
|
When should D file for removal?
|
30 days after the case becomes removable (usually when the complaint was filed) but may be when a D is dismissed
|
|
|
What should P do if she thinks the case was improperly removed from state court?
|
Motion to remand -file in 30 days
1. for lack of SMJ (can be raised anytime) 2. other reasons-defect in removal process, time limit) |
|
|
What is the Eerie Doctrine Rule concerning diversity jurisdiction?
|
for diversity or supplemental J, fed ct must apply the substantive law of the state in which they sit (including state common law), but may apply federal procedural law.
|
|
|
How is substantive law vs. procedural law determined?
|
What is the source of the conflicting federal law?
1. fed law conflicts with state law? generally fed pre-empts if law is constitutional. 2. FRCP pre-empts as long as FRCP complies with Rules Enabling Act 3. Federal judge-made law conflicts with state law? apply Eerie test (next card) |
|
|
The Eerie Doctrine
Does the cause of action arise under the federal Constitution, statutes, laws or treaties? |
Yes, Federal law applies under the Supremacy Clause
|
|
|
Eerie Doctrine (cont)
If the CoA does not arise under the federal Con, laws, etc. then is there a conflict between state and federal law on a particular matter? |
NO. then no Eerie problem; fed. procedural and state substantive laws apply.
|
|
|
If the CoA does not arise under the federal Con, laws, etc. then is there a conflict between state and federal law on a particular matter?
|
Yes, then is there an arguably procedural "federal directive on point"?
|
|
|
then is there an arguably procedural "federal directive on point"? if yes, then federal law applies.
|
if no, then is the matter procedural? (ct considers outcome determination, balance of interests, and deterence from forum shopping)
if no to that, then state law applies. if yes, then federal law applies. if applying the federal law would affect the outcome, then the rule is probably substantive. |
|
|
Examples of Substantive law?
|
Statute of limitations
rules for tolling statutes choice of law rules the more closely related the issue is to the CoA, the more likely it is substantive |
