1 / 26

Thurs. Sept. 20

Thurs. Sept. 20. federal subject matter jurisdiction diversity and alienage jurisdiction.

anitra
Télécharger la présentation

Thurs. Sept. 20

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Thurs. Sept. 20

  2. federal subject matter jurisdictiondiversity and alienage jurisdiction

  3. U.S. Const. Article III.Section. 2. Clause 1:The judicial Power shall extend …to Controversies …between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States…and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects. 

  4. Sec. 1332. - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs(a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between -

  5. (1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State;(3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and(4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

  6. A citizen of DC slips in falls in New York and sues a citizen of New York under New York negligence law for $100KDiversity case under 1332?Does Congress have the constitutional power to send this to federal court?

  7. Kramer v Caribbean Mills(US 1969)

  8. 28 USC §1359A district court shall not have jurisdiction of a civil action in which any party, by assignment or otherwise, has been improperly or collusively made or joined to invoke the jurisdiction of such court.

  9. Imagine that the contract right had been assigned to Kramer for $10,000, reserving no interest in the contract claim

  10. P (Texas) sells its contract right against D (New York) to Kramer (New York) for $1, with Kramer promising to pay back 95% of any recovery as a bonusKramer sues D in state courtMay D remove to federal court?

  11. P (Texas) assigns 1/10 of its contract right against D (New York) (worth $8,000 if the action prevails) to Kramer (New York) for $1,000P and Kramer sue D in state court in TexasMay D remove to federal court?

  12. Rose v. Giamatti(S.D. Ohio 1989)

  13. In fraudulent joinder cases the underlying reason for removal is that there is no factual basis upon which it can be claimed that the resident defendant is jointly liable or where there is such liability there is no purpose to prosecute the action against the resident defendant in good faith….Other courts have held that the party opposing remand has the burden of establishing either that there is no possibility that the plaintiff can establish a valid cause of action under state law against the non-diverse defendant, or that there has been an outright fraud in the plaintiff's pleading of jurisdictional facts.

  14. - P (NJ) wishes to sue the D Corp. for fraud- D Corp. has is incorporated in NY with PPB in NY- P does not want the action removed by the D Corp. to federal court- So P joins X (NJ), an accountant who was in part responsible for the D Corp.’s misrepresentations, as a defendant - Can the D Corp. successfully remove?

  15. removal

  16. 1441(a) Except as otherwise expressly provided by Act of Congress, any civil action brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant or the defendants, to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending.

  17. - A (Cal.) sues B (Cal.) under 42 USC § 1983 for illegal search and seizure - Suit is brought in California state court in San Francisco- May B successfully remove to N.D. Cal.?

  18. - A (Cal.) sues Officer B (Cal.) in California state court in San Francisco in connection with an arrest. - A has two causes of action against B: violation of federal civil rights and state law battery. - May B remove to the N.D. Cal.?

  19. A (Cal.) sues B (NY) and C (Cal) for battery in state court in NevadaCan B and C remove Can only B remove?

  20. A (Cal.) sues B (NY) and C (NJ) for batteryA suing for B for more than 75K but C for only 20KMay the case be successfully removed by B and C?

  21. A (Nev.) sues B (Cal.) and C (Oreg.) in California state court for batteryA asks for $80k each from B and CMay B and C remove?

  22. 1441(b)(2)A civil action otherwise removable solely on the basis of the jurisdiction under section 1332(a) of this title may not be removed if any of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action is brought.

  23. A (Nev.) sues B (France) and C (Oreg.) in Nevada state court for battery. A asks for $80k each from B and C. B wants to remove but C refuses. May the case be successfully removed to the D. Nev.?

  24. 1446(b)(2)(A) When a civil action is removed solely under section 1441(a), all defendants who have been properly joined and served must join in or consent to the removal of the action.

  25. A (Cal.) sues B (Cal.) in California state court for batteryB counterclaims against A for violation of federal civil rights lawMay B remove?May A remove?

More Related