Create
Learn
Share

Civil Procedure - Subject Matter Jurisdiction

rename
oni2051's version from 2016-11-29 22:10

Section

Question Answer
28 USC 1445Non-Removable Actions include actions arising under a state's workers compensation laws and actions involving violence against woman; these actions cannot be removed to federal court from state court
What plaintiff can and can't do with regard to removalplaintiff may plead only state law claims or he may join relevant parties who destroy diversity; plaintiff cannot join a defendant against whom he has no cause of action; plaintiff cannot disguise a federal cause of action that would make the case removable; certain causes of action are so exclusively federal that defendant can remove even if plaintiff did not plead them
American Fire & Casualty caseRemoval Case - state law claims against multiple defendants; a diverse defendant removed and district court heard all claims because there was a single cause of action
Borough of West Mifflin caseRemoval Case - can only remand state claims if they are independent of federal claims; when series of events are interrelated, state claim is not independent of federal claim and therefore the federal court cannot remand the state claims
28 USC 1441Removable Actions - if a claim could have originally been brought in a U.S. district court, it may be removed from a state court to a federal court in order to avoid local prejudice; only defendant can remove (this law serves as an equalizer); must be removed to the district embracing place where action is pending; actions arising under the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the U.S. are removable; if defendant is sued in his home state, he cannot remove to federal court; when there is an independent federal issue, the district court can hear all claims or remand the state law issues back to state court
United Mine Workers caseSupplemental Jurisdiction case - case had substantial federal law implications, therefore district court could exercise jurisdiction over state issues as well
Collateral Attack v. Direct Attackcollateral attack is an attack on a judgment in a separate/later proceeding; per Supreme Court, you cannot collaterally attack subject matter jurisdiction because of res judicata; direct attack is an attack during a proceeding, such as 12b1 and 12h
28 USC 1367Supplemental Jurisdiction - district courts have supplemental jurisdiction over all claims related to claims in the action; district courts can decline jurisdiction over claims that raise novel or complex issues of state law, or when a state claim substantially predominates, or when the district court has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction, or when other compelling reasons exist
Des Moines Navigation caseFederal Question Case - diversity jurisdiction did not exist but federal court heard and decided the case; applying 28 USC 1738 full faith and credit and res judicata under Rule 8, the court said the matter was settled
Exceptions to federal diversity jurisdictiondivorce/family law - despite diversity, federal courts do not hear these cases because state courts are specialized and have better expertise; federal courts also do not hear cases involving wills for the same reason
28 USC 1257provides appellate acess to the U.S. Supreme Court from two sources: appeals from directly lower federal court and if case has a federal question of defense
Mottley caseplaintiff cannot anticipate a federal defense in order to bring case in federal court; plaintiff's claim must be based on a provision of the Constitution, or a law or treaty of the U.S.
Legal Representatives in the Context of Domicilethe legal representative of an estate, infant, or incompetent shall be deemed a citizen of the state of the decedent, infant or incompetent
28 USC 1369a corporate is a citizen of the state in which it is incorporated and the state in which it has its principal place of business
Hertz v. Friend caseprincipal place of business is determined by the nerve center test; nerve center of a corporation is where the corporate headquarters is located or where the executive decisions are made
Strawbridge caseno diversity if any plaintiff is a citizen of the same state as any defendant
Capron v. Van Noorden caseplaintiff and defendant were both residents of NC; tried to bring action in federal court; case was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived
Mas v. Perry casedomicile of plaintiff was same as defendant because defendant was living in LA permanently
Diversity Jurisdiction and Aggregationa single platintiff can aggregate claims against a single defendant; two plaintiffs may not aggregate if they have separate and distinct claims; if there is a single indivisible harm, plaintiffs may aggregate
28 USC 1332Diversity Jurisdiction - diversity exists between citizens of different states, controversies between a state or its citizens and foreign states or citizens, when the U.S. is named as a party, controversies involving treaties, ambassadors, and other federal matters, and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000; claims cannot be artificially inflated to reach the amount in controversy requirement; claims may be aggregated per the aggregation requirement
3 Main Tests of Federal Jurisdiction - Creation Testaction is granted by federal law
3 Main Tests of Federal Jurisdiction - Construction Testrelief depends on constructin/interpretation of federal law
3 Main Tests of Federal Jurisdiction - Implied RemedyCongress implied or intended there to be a remedy; look at the purpose of the statute
State Industrial Commissionsis required to hear work-related claims in most states at the exclusion of state and federal courts
Exlcusive Federal Jurisdictionfederal district courts have exlcusive federal jurisdiction over Maritime matters (28 USC 1333), Bankruptcy (28 USC 1334), Patent, Copyrights, Plant Varietal Protection, Designs, Trademarks, Unfair Competition (28 USC 1338), and Actions Against Foreign Consuls (28 USC 1351)
Well-Pleaded Complaint Rulemust be clear from face of complaint that there is a federal question; either federal law creates the cause of action or plaintiff's right to relief turns on a substantial question of federal law; artful pleading does not give federal courts jurisdiction; see Rule 8a
Rule 8aa pleading that states a claim for relief must contain: a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction, a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand for the relief sought
Smith v. Kansas City Title casecase started as a state action but turned on federal issues so it's a federal question case
Moore v. Chesapeake casestate law that references federal law is not enough to invoke federal jurisdiction
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals casefederal law is implicated but case is over state law; state has jurisdiction (unless case turns on federal issue)
28 USC 1331federal district courts have original jurisdiction over all civil actions arising under the Constitution of the U.S., laws of the U.S., and treaties of the U.S.
General AnalysisWhat do the rules say about this? What is the judicial instruction of the rule? What do statutes say about this? What does the Constitution say about this?
memorize