Term
|
Definition
| Appellate jxn when: disagreement among lower courts or split in fed circs/state high courts |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| 1332 requires complete diversity across "v" |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Class Action Fairness Act of 2005: fed jxn if >$5 mil, >=100 members, and any P from dif state than D |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| P must plead diversity and if D challenges, burden shifts to D |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| place you're found and intend to remain |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| judgments are invalid if court has no SMJ over case |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Art. III has negative pregnant and original/appellate jxn of SCOTUS don't overlap. Art. III is floor, not exhaustive list... (part about jxn is BAD LAW) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Domicile is permanent home and place where you intend to remain |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A corporation's principle place of biz under 1332(c)(1) is its nerve center- where the major activities are directed and controlled by executives |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| fed cts have orig jxn over civil actions arising under federal laws |
|
|
Term
| Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Mottley |
|
Definition
| To sue under 1331, P must assert claim arising under fed law (aka "Well-pleaded complaint rule"); fed law must be necessary to complaint |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Holmes Creation Test- suit arises under fed law if the law creates the COA |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Ingredient/But for test- fed jxn if no case but for fed law... BAD LAW (now, must have explicit right to sue and be sued under statute/charter) |
|
|
Term
| Smith v. Kansas City Title & Trust Co. |
|
Definition
| If fed Q embedded in state COA, fed jxn... BAD LAW (now look at Merrell Dow to see what can come in) |
|
|
Term
| Moore v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. |
|
Definition
| no fed jxn even if embedded fed Q... BAD LAW (because put lower courts in disarray after Smith and Moore) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| when fed statute embedded in state claim, fed jxn only if fed statute has private right of action (either express or implied [see Cort]) |
|
|
Term
| Bivens v. 6 Unknown Agents of FBI DISSENT |
|
Definition
| Infers neg pregnant: unless Congress explicitly says COA allowed, none should be allowed |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Implied right of action factors:
1) P especial benefit
2) Legislative intent for remedy
3) Legislative purpose/scheme (is there alt method of relief?)
4) Generally relegated to state law or is fed matter? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Merrell Dow, sufficient, but not necessary for fed jxn. Can have fed jxn if:
1) fed issue is substantial to case
2) Issue important to fed statutory scheme
3) no floodgates disrupting division btn fed & state cts |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Counterclaim & crossclaim |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Required joinder of parties |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Permissive joinder of parties |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Misjoinder and nonjoinder of parties |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Diversity rules for class actions cases |
|
|
Term
| Rule 13 compulsory counterclaim |
|
Definition
| Arises from same T&O; must be asserted now or RJ effect |
|
|
Term
| Rule 13 permissive counterclaim |
|
Definition
| Anything not compulsory (not same T&O) |
|
|
Term
| Cross claims- always compulsory or always permissive? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Under Rule 14, who can be served and what rules apply? |
|
Definition
| Any third party believed to be liable for the claim can be served, and all normal rules for claims, counterclaims, and cross-claims apply |
|
|
Term
| Is Rule 18 compulsory or permissive? |
|
Definition
| Both; compulsory if same T&O |
|
|
Term
| When does Rule 19 (required joinder of parties) apply? |
|
Definition
| Same T&O and no deprivation of SMJ |
|
|
Term
| Is misjoinder under rule 21 grounds for dismissal? |
|
Definition
| No; court may add or drop a party/claim at any time |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Intervention as of right (provided by statute or not allowing would impede party's ability to protect its interest |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| May intervene if conditional right by fed statute or claim/defense in common with parties to the suit |
|
|
Term
| Is intervention ever required? |
|
Definition
| No; no waiver for not intervening |
|
|
Term
| How can Ds force Ps into a suit if they want? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs |
|
Definition
| Fed courts can hear pendant state claims when attached to a fed claim if same T&O, but up to trial judge discretion (judicial econ, convenience, fairness to litigants, comity with state courts) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Fed cts can included parties against whom state claims are made if hooked to a fed Q claim if no fed statute prohibits jxn and same T&O |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| No supp jxn for state law claims unless allowed by statute... OVERRULED BY FINLEY |
|
|
Term
| Owen Equipment & Erection v. Kroger |
|
Definition
| No diversity jxn if at any time there's not complete diversity across the v |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Wide open door that lets in a civil action over which fed ct has jxn and supp claims from same T&O |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Kicks out claims against Ds joined by 14, 19, 20, or 24 OR claims by any P joined under 19 or 24 that break diversity or amt in cont |
|
|
Term
| What is implicitly allowed by 1367's silence? |
|
Definition
| 1) Any crossclaims, 2) Rule 23 class actions, 3) claims by Ps joined under 20 against defendants, and PROBABLY 4) aggregation, although there's no official word on this |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| gives courts discretion to dismiss claims allowed in under 1367(a) and (b); similar to Gibbs factors |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Tolling provision for SoL; extends SoL. Although implies that it applies to claims dismissed under (a), can assume applies to claims dismissed under (a)-(c) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Local controversy exception for class actions: bars fed jxn when >2/3 of class Ps from same state of filing, >= 1 D from that state, and principle injury occurred in that state |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Gives fed cts discretion to deny a class action in fed ct by assessing factors and a balancing test |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Joint tortfeasors not required parties under 19(a); are permissive parties under 20 |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Not all Ps need to meet amount in controversy (overrules Zahn)... BAD LAW |
|
|
Term
| Patterson Enterprises v. Bridgestone/Firestone |
|
Definition
| If party joined in initial complaint, supp jxn. BAD LAW |
|
|
Term
| U.S. Amicus Brief in Ortega v. Starkist Foods |
|
Definition
| Lets in any claims not precluded under 1367(b) even if fail amt in cont or diversity |
|
|
Term
| Exxon Mobil v. Allapatah (Kennedy) |
|
Definition
| Lets in any claims not precluded under 1367(b) even if fail amt in cont; does NOT let in claims that fail diversity |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Does not let in any claims that don't meet both diversity and amt in cont |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Actions brought in state ct can be removed by D to fed ct of same district/state if could have originally been brought in fed ct |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Actions can be removed only if no D is a citizen of state where action is pending |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court has discretion to remand in state law pendant cases |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Ps can't remove a state action to fed ct solely because D filed a fed counterclaim |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Lack of diversity of citizenship can only defeat removal if the defendant is "real" and not a fictitious entity added just to defeat removal |
|
|
Term
| How can a party attempt to defeat removal jxn? |
|
Definition
1) Add fictitious party (won't work b/c of Rose)
2) Add claim of less than $75k (won't work if added post-removal and used strategically)
3) Additional non-diverse parties (third party D's don't count, though; only 1st party Ds can defeat removal)
4) Additional claims with no supp jxn under 1367
5) Dropping the fed claim (ct can remand under Cohill) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| can file for removal within 30 days after service or receipt of complaint |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| must promptly notify all parties for removal and once notified, case is deemed removed and fed ct (must be in same district) has authority unless it remands |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Procedure after Removal (Remand/Review) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| motion to remand must be made within 30 days after removal filing unless for lack of SMJ (can't be waived) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| can't review remands made for procedural or SMJ reasons; can only appeal denials of remands after entire case is over |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| court has discretion to deny joinder if it would destroy SMJ, or court can permit joinder and remand to state ct if would destroy SMJ |
|
|
Term
| Thermtron v. Hermansdorfer |
|
Definition
| Can review remand if made by discretion and not for lack of SMJ/procedural defect |
|
|
Term
| Carlsbad Tech v. Hif Bio Inc. |
|
Definition
| If fed claim exists when filed but eliminated, ct has discretion to hear supp claims or remand; if remand, not b/c of SMJ and is instead discretionary and subject to review |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| Court can remand removed cases if all fed claims are removed for reasons of efficiency or fairness |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| PJ acquired by personal service in state or voluntary appearance of defendant to contest suit on the merits |
|
|
