Law School Discussion

Civ Pro Question

Civ Pro Question
« on: July 19, 2008, 07:50:02 PM »
I have a hypo that is bothering me.

 Let's say that X lives in SC and wants to sue (1) a SC company, (2) a GA company, and (3) a MN company.  Diversity jurisdiction is out per Strawbridge.  If one of the causes of action that X is going to use is a federal statute (along with other common-law state actions), then may X file in fed court under federal question?

Also, could X just file in state court even though part of his complaint will utilize federal statutes?  Thanks. 

Re: Civ Pro Question
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2008, 07:58:11 PM »
I have a hypo that is bothering me.

 Let's say that X lives in SC and wants to sue (1) a SC company, (2) a GA company, and (3) a MN company.  Diversity jurisdiction is out per Strawbridge.  If one of the causes of action that X is going to use is a federal statute (along with other common-law state actions), then may X file in fed court under federal question?

Also, could X just file in state court even though part of his complaint will utilize federal statutes?  Thanks. 

Civ pro feels so long ago, but I'll give it a shot.  Shouldn't 28 USC 1331 take care of your first question (and 1367 might bring in the state actions)?  And unless the federal statute provides exclusive original jdx to federal courts, X should be able to file in SC's court of general jdx (and fight removal to federal court).

Re: Civ Pro Question
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2008, 09:31:47 PM »
I have a hypo that is bothering me.

 Let's say that X lives in SC and wants to sue (1) a SC company, (2) a GA company, and (3) a MN company.  Diversity jurisdiction is out per Strawbridge.  If one of the causes of action that X is going to use is a federal statute (along with other common-law state actions), then may X file in fed court under federal question?

Also, could X just file in state court even though part of his complaint will utilize federal statutes?  Thanks. 

X can bring fed q claims in fed court and add the other state law claims under supplemental jurisdiction if there they arrise from the same transaction or occurrence.  Supp j is discretionary and can be denied if the FQ is dismissed early in the proceeding, the state law is complex or state law issues would predominate.

State courts can rule on federal question claims but will be subject to fed review unless there is an adequate and independent state law ground.

jacy85

  • *****
  • 6789
    • View Profile
Re: Civ Pro Question
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2008, 06:19:21 AM »
I have a hypo that is bothering me.

 Let's say that X lives in SC and wants to sue (1) a SC company, (2) a GA company, and (3) a MN company.  Diversity jurisdiction is out per Strawbridge.  If one of the causes of action that X is going to use is a federal statute (along with other common-law state actions), then may X file in fed court under federal question?

Also, could X just file in state court even though part of his complaint will utilize federal statutes?  Thanks. 

X can bring fed q claims in fed court and add the other state law claims under supplemental jurisdiction if there they arrise from the same transaction or occurrence.  Supp j is discretionary and can be denied if the FQ is dismissed early in the proceeding, the state law is complex or state law issues would predominate.

State courts can rule on federal question claims but will be subject to fed review unless there is an adequate and independent state law ground.

Exactly what I was going to say. I felt all excited, because I just reviewed fed civ pro last night.  And here you are, beating me to it.  Way to ruin it for me.  :D  ;)

Re: Civ Pro Question
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2008, 08:36:20 AM »
Thanks thus far.  Could X also file in SC state court even if a few of his causes of action are going to be federal statutes while the rest will be state common-law COAs?

jacy85

  • *****
  • 6789
    • View Profile
Re: Civ Pro Question
« Reply #5 on: July 20, 2008, 10:09:25 AM »
Yes - see the last line of 008's response.

The only except would be for those few matters in which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction (like copyright/IP, for example)

derby

Re: Civ Pro Question
« Reply #6 on: July 20, 2008, 12:18:23 PM »
supplemental J is T&O but you cant force a P to implead a party you want to sue but don't have diversity with and assert a claim against them.

Re: Civ Pro Question
« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2008, 02:37:47 PM »
I have a hypo that is bothering me.

 Let's say that X lives in SC and wants to sue (1) a SC company, (2) a GA company, and (3) a MN company.  Diversity jurisdiction is out per Strawbridge.  If one of the causes of action that X is going to use is a federal statute (along with other common-law state actions), then may X file in fed court under federal question?

Also, could X just file in state court even though part of his complaint will utilize federal statutes?  Thanks. 

X can bring fed q claims in fed court and add the other state law claims under supplemental jurisdiction if there they arrise from the same transaction or occurrence.  Supp j is discretionary and can be denied if the FQ is dismissed early in the proceeding, the state law is complex or state law issues would predominate.

State courts can rule on federal question claims but will be subject to fed review unless there is an adequate and independent state law ground.

Exactly what I was going to say. I felt all excited, because I just reviewed fed civ pro last night.  And here you are, beating me to it.  Way to ruin it for me.  :D  ;)

 :D  I got all excited too! haha! :)

Re: Civ Pro Question
« Reply #8 on: July 20, 2008, 02:40:43 PM »
supplemental J is T&O but you cant force a P to implead a party you want to sue but don't have diversity with and assert a claim against them.

Yeah unless they are an indispensible third party

jacy85

  • *****
  • 6789
    • View Profile
Re: Civ Pro Question
« Reply #9 on: July 20, 2008, 03:13:55 PM »
supplemental J is T&O but you cant force a P to implead a party you want to sue but don't have diversity with and assert a claim against them.

What are you talking about?  Impleader is done by a Defendant for the purpose of seeking contribution or indemnification.    Furthermore, the plaintiff's citizenship is irrelevant for impleader, because it's a claim by a defendant.  And the third party the defendant is trying to implead is never an indispensible party, because the defendant will have their own separate claim arising against the third party if the defendant is actually found liable in the original action.  Finally, supplemental jurisdiction is only unavailable when the PLAINTIFF tries to add a claim that destroys diversity; a defendant can make claims that would otherwise destroy diversity because we're only concerned with the plaintiff trying to make an end run around federal diversity jurisdiction requirements.

The only other time you have to worry about diversity of citizenship when you have impleader is when the plaintiff is trying to assert a crossclaim against the third party defendant.  This is under the limitation of a PLAINTIFF asserted supplemental jurisdiction that violates complete diversity.





And apparently federal civil procedures is the ONLY thing I'm ready to be tested for on the bar exam.