Civil Procedure Outline-
CIVIL PROCEDURE OUTLINE – FINAL
I. FACTORS TO DETERMINE WHERE TO BRING A LAWSUIT
The following decide a party’s choice of forum:
A) Subject Matter Jurisdiction [nature of cases federal courts can hear]
B) Personal Jurisdiction [whether there is relation to a state]
C) Venue [location]
A. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
Article III, § 2 created federal judicial power. The two most important types of
cases litigated are cases arising under the U.S. Constitution and federal laws and
cases between citizens of different states.
[Note that there is concurrent jurisdiction between federal and state courts,
meaning that a case may be brought in either if designated within Article III, § 2]
1. DIVERSITY – used to avoid prejudice “between citizens of different
states.” Under the federal diversity jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, a
federal court has subject matter jurisdiction over a matter where:
(1) There is complete diversity among the parties such that no
plaintiff shares citizenship with any defendant; and
(2) The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
1(a) Individuals: The courts have equated the state citizenship of natural
persons with domicile in a state. Although a person can have more
than one residence at one time, he can have only one domicile at a
time.
• Domicile Test – test to determine whether one is a resident of the
state where the suit is brought and whether they intend to stay there
indefinitely [need to be a citizen of the U.S. and a state]
• Gordon v. Steele: a student’s state citizenship was determined by
her domicile at the time of filing the lawsuit [psychological
home]
– a person does not lose her old domicile until she acquires a new
one
• Mas v. Perry: a federal court has jurisdiction over parties where
there is complete diversity at the time the complaint if filed,
1
,Civil Procedure Outline-
meaning no party on one side may be a citizen of the same
state as any party on the other side [Mr. Mas could invoke alien
2
,Civil Procedure Outline-
jurisdiction due to Article III, § 2, unless he was a
permanent citizen]
• Strawbridge v. Curtis: to be a proper diversity case, no plaintiff
can be a citizen of the same state as any defendant [look at each
plaintiff and defendant as a separate action to determine]
1(b) Corporations: viewed as citizens of the state in which they were
incorporated [corporate charter] See Marshall v. Baltimore & Ohio R.
Co.,
i.e. the Marshall rule
• 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c) states “any State by which it has been
incorporated and the State where it has its principal place of
business” [Can only have one principal place of business]
• Olson Company v. City of Winona: addressed tests to determine
principal place of business …
1) Total Activity Test – combination of nerve-center
and activities tests
2) Nerve-Center Test – Corporate headquarters, where
the supreme direction comes from (brain)
3) Daily Activities Test – where majority of labor and work is
done, most visible to community (muscle)
[Note that with a partnership, you must look to the
citizenship of every partner!!!]
2. AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY – Not found in Art. III, § 2! (Found in
U.S.C. §1332) Amount in controversy has to be $75,000.01!
Determined at outset of case to see if federal courts can hear.
• St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.: a plaintiff’s
claim will be upheld if it appears to be in good faith, unless it
appears to a legal certainty that the claim is really for less than the
jurisdictional amount
• Diefenthal v C.A.B.: there needs to be a legal basis for the claim,
i.e. real world damages, even if made in good faith. Jurisdiction is
based on the plaintiff’s claim at the beginning, so need to
substantiate it to convince jury
3. Aggregation of Claims – who can tag along in lawsuits and who
qualifies to bring a lawsuit
(a) Plaintiff A sues defendant Z on one claim ($50K)
3
, Civil Procedure Outline-
Plaintiff A sues defendant Z on a separate claim ($50K)
□ If suing one party, you can add up all claims, related or unrelated
(b) Plaintiff A sues defendant Z on one claim ($30K)
Plaintiff A sues defendant X on one claim
($60K)
□ If 2 defendants, then you need to meet the requirement
separately for each
(c) Plaintiff A sues defendant Z on one claim ($80K)
Plaintiff A sues defendant X on one claim
($60K)
If multiple defendants, you have to meet requirement separately
(In this case, there is a proper claim against Defendant Z)
(d) Plaintiff A sues defendant Z
($80K) Plaintiff B sues defendant
Z ($20K) Plaintiff C sues
defendant Z ($4K)
□ Supplemental jurisdiction means that if one plaintiff meets the
requirement, then other plaintiffs can tag along
(e) A sues defendant Z ($40K)
Plaintiff B sues defendant Z
($50K)
□ No one meets the requirement here…
4. Constitutional Scope of Diversity Jurisdiction Compared to
Its Statutory Scope
• Kline v. Burke Construction Co.: it is up to Congress to directly
bestow jurisdiction on the lower federal courts (Congress giveth
and Congress taketh away) [Constitution]
• Casualty Co. v. Tashire: case is a proper diversity case under Art.
III, § 2 so long as at least one plaintiff is diverse from one
defendant, what might be called “minimal diversity” rather than
“complete diversity” (defined citizens of different states in the
Constitution) [Tashire narrows scope of diversity, but
Strawbridge is still precedent]
5. ARISING UNDER JURISDICTION – In interpreting s. 1331, the
Supreme Court has held that a case only arises under federal law in one of
two situations: where if the plaintiff seeks relief created by federal law, or
in some cases, where she seeks to recover on a state law cause of action,
but must prove a proposition of federal law in order to recover on her state
4
CIVIL PROCEDURE OUTLINE – FINAL
I. FACTORS TO DETERMINE WHERE TO BRING A LAWSUIT
The following decide a party’s choice of forum:
A) Subject Matter Jurisdiction [nature of cases federal courts can hear]
B) Personal Jurisdiction [whether there is relation to a state]
C) Venue [location]
A. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION
Article III, § 2 created federal judicial power. The two most important types of
cases litigated are cases arising under the U.S. Constitution and federal laws and
cases between citizens of different states.
[Note that there is concurrent jurisdiction between federal and state courts,
meaning that a case may be brought in either if designated within Article III, § 2]
1. DIVERSITY – used to avoid prejudice “between citizens of different
states.” Under the federal diversity jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, a
federal court has subject matter jurisdiction over a matter where:
(1) There is complete diversity among the parties such that no
plaintiff shares citizenship with any defendant; and
(2) The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
1(a) Individuals: The courts have equated the state citizenship of natural
persons with domicile in a state. Although a person can have more
than one residence at one time, he can have only one domicile at a
time.
• Domicile Test – test to determine whether one is a resident of the
state where the suit is brought and whether they intend to stay there
indefinitely [need to be a citizen of the U.S. and a state]
• Gordon v. Steele: a student’s state citizenship was determined by
her domicile at the time of filing the lawsuit [psychological
home]
– a person does not lose her old domicile until she acquires a new
one
• Mas v. Perry: a federal court has jurisdiction over parties where
there is complete diversity at the time the complaint if filed,
1
,Civil Procedure Outline-
meaning no party on one side may be a citizen of the same
state as any party on the other side [Mr. Mas could invoke alien
2
,Civil Procedure Outline-
jurisdiction due to Article III, § 2, unless he was a
permanent citizen]
• Strawbridge v. Curtis: to be a proper diversity case, no plaintiff
can be a citizen of the same state as any defendant [look at each
plaintiff and defendant as a separate action to determine]
1(b) Corporations: viewed as citizens of the state in which they were
incorporated [corporate charter] See Marshall v. Baltimore & Ohio R.
Co.,
i.e. the Marshall rule
• 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c) states “any State by which it has been
incorporated and the State where it has its principal place of
business” [Can only have one principal place of business]
• Olson Company v. City of Winona: addressed tests to determine
principal place of business …
1) Total Activity Test – combination of nerve-center
and activities tests
2) Nerve-Center Test – Corporate headquarters, where
the supreme direction comes from (brain)
3) Daily Activities Test – where majority of labor and work is
done, most visible to community (muscle)
[Note that with a partnership, you must look to the
citizenship of every partner!!!]
2. AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY – Not found in Art. III, § 2! (Found in
U.S.C. §1332) Amount in controversy has to be $75,000.01!
Determined at outset of case to see if federal courts can hear.
• St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.: a plaintiff’s
claim will be upheld if it appears to be in good faith, unless it
appears to a legal certainty that the claim is really for less than the
jurisdictional amount
• Diefenthal v C.A.B.: there needs to be a legal basis for the claim,
i.e. real world damages, even if made in good faith. Jurisdiction is
based on the plaintiff’s claim at the beginning, so need to
substantiate it to convince jury
3. Aggregation of Claims – who can tag along in lawsuits and who
qualifies to bring a lawsuit
(a) Plaintiff A sues defendant Z on one claim ($50K)
3
, Civil Procedure Outline-
Plaintiff A sues defendant Z on a separate claim ($50K)
□ If suing one party, you can add up all claims, related or unrelated
(b) Plaintiff A sues defendant Z on one claim ($30K)
Plaintiff A sues defendant X on one claim
($60K)
□ If 2 defendants, then you need to meet the requirement
separately for each
(c) Plaintiff A sues defendant Z on one claim ($80K)
Plaintiff A sues defendant X on one claim
($60K)
If multiple defendants, you have to meet requirement separately
(In this case, there is a proper claim against Defendant Z)
(d) Plaintiff A sues defendant Z
($80K) Plaintiff B sues defendant
Z ($20K) Plaintiff C sues
defendant Z ($4K)
□ Supplemental jurisdiction means that if one plaintiff meets the
requirement, then other plaintiffs can tag along
(e) A sues defendant Z ($40K)
Plaintiff B sues defendant Z
($50K)
□ No one meets the requirement here…
4. Constitutional Scope of Diversity Jurisdiction Compared to
Its Statutory Scope
• Kline v. Burke Construction Co.: it is up to Congress to directly
bestow jurisdiction on the lower federal courts (Congress giveth
and Congress taketh away) [Constitution]
• Casualty Co. v. Tashire: case is a proper diversity case under Art.
III, § 2 so long as at least one plaintiff is diverse from one
defendant, what might be called “minimal diversity” rather than
“complete diversity” (defined citizens of different states in the
Constitution) [Tashire narrows scope of diversity, but
Strawbridge is still precedent]
5. ARISING UNDER JURISDICTION – In interpreting s. 1331, the
Supreme Court has held that a case only arises under federal law in one of
two situations: where if the plaintiff seeks relief created by federal law, or
in some cases, where she seeks to recover on a state law cause of action,
but must prove a proposition of federal law in order to recover on her state
4
