Federal Civil Procedure
I. Subject Matter Jurisdiction
The Authority of a federal court to hear a case as apposed to a state court
(can not be waived. If there’s not SMJ to be in federal court, then you cant say its ok ill be here anyway)
A. Original Jurisdiction
1. Federal Question (28 USC §1331)
a. Article 3 of the constitution:
It establishes that there is a S.Ct. and that congress has to establish all the other federal courts.
1. Federal Courts have limited jurisdiction over issues “Arising Under” the constitution, treaties and federal law.
b. Well pleaded complaint Rule
1. (Mottley v railroad) The actual “federal question” must fall within the “four corners” of the complain (the original suit)
c. Necessary ingredients test (WAY TO VAGUE)
1. Federal question must be a necessary ingredients of the case
d. Holmes Creation testLStill to vague
1. A suit “arises under” the law that creates a cause of action
e. “Harms” test (expanding on the Holmes test)
1. seeking a remedy that comes from a case that arises under federal law, treaty or constitution
2. Construction: the basis of you case can not exist without interpretation of a federal law, treaties or constitution (your case needs to be about federal law, treaties or constitution)
3. Policy: this will never happen because 1) federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and 2) because congress likes catch all so this will cover anything that will come up (lets any federal court hear cases because it is about a major policy issue that it would otherwise not be able to hear)
2. Diversity Jurisdiction (28 USC §1332)
(Across the line and more than $75)
a. Diversity of Citizenship/Domicile
True fixed home/residence were you intend to return to (Mass v Perry)
1. Domicile of individual:
i. No Δ can be from the same state as any π
1. No parties can be from the same state
2. Foreigner who applied for permanent residency in the US in now considered domiciled in they are domiciled.
ii. Change of Domicile
1. move your physical residence
2. and have intent to remain there indefinitely
2. A corporation can have domicile in more than one state. A corporation has domicile in:
1. The state(s) in which it is incorporated and
2. The state in which it has its principal place of business.
i. Principle place of business of cooperation determined by:
(The test used is determined by state law)
1. Nerve Center test: The “locus” of the corporations’ decision-making authority and overall control
2. Corporate Activities test: (or called “operating assets”) location of a corporation’s production or service activities
3. Total Activity test: This test is a hybrid of the other two and considers all the circumstances surrounding a corporation’s business (balances all relevant factors)
b. Amount in Controversy
1. It has to be factually possible that the amount in question can be over $75,000.
2. You can count punitive damages towards it
3. Δ has to have a legal certainty that you can not prove over $75,000
4. If you don’t recover the amount in controversy required, the court MAY impose coasts on the π or they can just deny costs to the π
5. Aggregation
i. 1 π may aggregate claims against 1 Δ if the claims are similar
ii. 2 π’s may aggregate claims against 1 Δ if the claims are of common and undivided interest
iii. 1 π and 2 Δ, then you may not aggregate the claims
1. BUT is the two claims are common and undivided interest, then the courts MAY let the claims be aggregated
B. Supplemental Jurisdiction (28 USC §1367)
(Authorizes a Federal court to hear a claim that is otherwise jurisdictionally insufficient)
1. Federal courts MUST (shall) exercise supplemental jurisdiction over:
a. Original π has original jurisdiction with Federal Question
b. The added π must have a case that arises out of “a common nuclease of operative facts”
2. Federal courts SHALL NOT exercise supplemental jurisdiction over:
a. If you add a party that that destroys diversity of citizenship
3. Federal court MAY exercise supplemental jurisdiction over:
a. If the claim raises an issue about state law that they think the state needs to interpret.
b. If the state law is the main issue of the entire claim and over shadows any federal law
c. The district court had dismissed all claims over which it had original jurisdiction
d. Exceptional circumstances (Catch all but court must explain why they sent it to state court)
Amount in controversy for supplemental Jurisdiction: Exxon v. Alapattah
۞As long as one plaintiff meets the amount requirement to give it original jurisdiction, then all the other plaintiffs can be supplemental plaintiffs EVEN if they don’t meet the amount in controversy requirement. (There still has to be complete diversity) This is because judicial economy won out over limited jurisdiction policy.
C. Removal (28 USC §1441)
a. It’s the power of federal court to exercise jurisdiction over an action originally filled in state court. (ONLY the Δ can remove because π got to pick the original court) This can be removed if:
1. it could have been originally filed in Federal Court
2. If no Δ is citizen of the state where the action was brought (no removal to destroy diversity) (diversity case)
3. Supplemental jurisdiction extends to removal
4. If the state court does not have jurisdiction (if federal court has exclusive jurisdiction), then Δ can still remove the claim. (This is basically a time saver so that the π does not have to re-file the whole thing again in federal court but can just move it on over. This
es of the state as long as the exercise of personal jurisdiction to do not offend the idea of “fair play and “ and as long as constitutional and long-arm are set. General can be exercised when the Δ is present in the foreign state threw its systematic and continues contacts OR if the Δ consent.
Specific Jurisdiction Rule: A court can exercise specific in persona Jurisdiction over Δ if the Δ’s contact (even a single one) give rise to a cause of action in a state so longs as the Δ purposefully avails itself of the benefits and protection of the state AND the Δ “reasonably anticipates” that it will be called into the state to be in court so long as the contact meet constitutional due process and satisfy the long arm statutes of the state as long as the exercise of personal jurisdiction to do not offend the idea of “fair play and substantial justice “ and as long as constitutional and long-arm are set.
-General can be exercised when the Δ is present in the foreign state threw its systematic and continues contacts OR if the Δ consent.
d. Service Rule 4 (e) & (k)
14th amendment due process:
a. D has right to know there is a lawsuit
b. D has right to time to answer the lawsuit
2. 4(e): Unless otherwise provided by federal law, service on an individual from whom a waiver has not been obtained and filed, other than an infant or incompetent person, may be effected in any judicial district of the US
a. 4(e)(1): pursuant to the law of the state where the federal court sits or where service is effected
b. 4(e)(2): by leaving copy of summons and complaint (process) with the individual or leaving it at their dwelling with a person of suitable age and discretion residing therein or delivering to their agent
(who can be served and how to serve them)
3. 4(k): Service of process or a waiver establishes jurisdiction over a defendant
a. 4(k)(1): Who could be subjected to the jurisdiction of a court of general jurisdiction in the state in which the district court is located
b. 4(k)(2): Service of process or waiver is also effective for FQ claims when D is not subject to jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction of any state (catchall)
(claiming jurisdiction over a Δ and waiver)
4. Notice: formal notification to D
