Civ Pro Set 1
For a claim brought under diversity jurisdiction, __________ is required to be alleged as damages to satisfy the jurisdictional amount
An amount that exceeds $75,000
For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, a corporation is considered to be a citizen of:
Every state in which it is incorporated and the one state in which it has its principal place of business
While working on a site in State A, a State B construction worker was standing near a steel crane when the crane's boom swung near a high tension power line. The worker was electrocuted and severely injured. The worker filed an action in federal district court against the power company that owns the power lines. The action seeks $500,000 and alleges that the power company's negligent construction, maintenance, and operation of the power lines caused the injury. The power company is a State A corporation and all its operations are in State A. The power company filed a third-party complaint against the owner-operator of the crane, a State B citizen. The third-party claim is based on state law and alleges that the crane's owner-operator is liable to the power company for any liability the power company has to the injured worker. The worker amended his complaint to add a state law negligence claim for $500,000 against the crane's owner-operator. Does the federal court have subject matter jurisdiction over the worker's claim against the owner-operator of the crane?
No, because the court does not have supplemental jurisdiction over the worker's claim against the owner-operator of the crane.
A resident of State A sued a resident of State B in federal district court in State B for breach of contract. Jurisdiction was based on diversity of citizenship. The plaintiff alleged that the contract was entered into in State C and was to be performed in State D. The plaintiff further alleged that the defendant failed to perform. While hearing this case, what substantive law should the federal district court apply?
The law that the State B state court would apply.
For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, the state citizenship of an individual is determined by:
The state in which the person has his permanent home and to which he intends to return
A party's state citizenship for purposes of diversity jurisdiction is determined:
When the lawsuit is filed
A citizen of State A asserted a state law claim of $80,000 against a citizen of State B in the federal district court. The State B citizen has a state law claim against another citizen of State B for $90,000 that arose out of the same transaction or occurrence as the original complaint. As a result, the State B citizen brought a third-party action against that person. Does the court have subject matter jurisdiction over the State B citizen's claim in the third-party action?
Yes, because the court has supplemental jurisdiction.
Four investors, all of whom are American citizens, own as a partnership a chain of 15 car dealerships in a number of states. Two of the investors live in State A, one lives in State B, and one lives in State C. The investors leave the day-to-day operation of each dealership to a manager that the partnership employs. The investors leave the management of the entire chain of dealerships and the day-to-day operation of the partnership to several key officers that it employs. The officers operate out of the partnership's largest dealership, which is in State D. A customer of the State D dealership sued the partnership in federal district court in State D, alleging fraud and breach of contract arising from her purchase of a car, and claiming, in good faith, damages exceeding $75,000. The customer is a citizen of State D. Does the federal district court in State D have subject matter jurisdiction over the customer's action against the partnership?
Yes, because the plaintiff customer is a citizen of State D while the defendant partnership is a citizen of State A, State B, and State C.
