1L Civ Pro 1331 and 1332 Basics

• The district courts have original jurisdiction of all civil actions
• arising under the constitution, law or treaties of the US

• Plaintiff’s complaint (original cause of action) must raise a federal question (assert
• a claim of relief founded on federal law) rather
• than anticipate a defense from defendant.

(a) Artfulpleading (anticipating and including afederal defense on a complaint) does not create SMJ. True nature of complaint cannot be concealed. Attempt by the P to conceal the true nature of the case in order to access or avoid federal court

(b) If claim is based on state substantive law (ie breach of contract rather than copyright infringement) then does not meet well pleaded complaint rule and not w/i jurisdiction of federal question

• (1) Purpose: protect out-of-state parties
• from local prejudice. Protects P; state judges are elected v. federal judges
• are appointed and less susceptible to politics

• (2) Allows the federal District Courts to have original jurisdiction of
• civil cases, and to hear cases in which the claims arise solely under state
• law…

• (1) ★The burden of pleading and
• burden of proof for diverse citizenship is upon the party invoking federal
• jurisdiction

Amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest & costs

i) Good faith allegation-Plaintiff controls value of claim-determined at time of complaint

• (1) sum claimed
• by the plaintiff controls if the claim is apparently made in good faith.

• (a) There must be a legal
• possibility that recovery will exceed the jurisdictional amount of $75,000.
• The court will believe the plaintiff’s
• claims unless it would be legally impossible for the plaintiff to recover
• >$75,000.

(2) The amount in controversy is determined at the time of the complaint.★

• (3) Plaintiff and their counsel should be
• afforded appropriate and reasonable opportunity to show good faith ★

• IE: provide supplement briefs,
• new evidence… Judge can’t rule immediately

• (1) Plaintiff Losses & Profits
• Unjustly Received by defendant: Amount of damages are measured either by
• the plaintiff's losses, or by the profits unjustly received by the defendant.

• (2) ★Punitive
• Damages subject to controlling law of state: If punitive damages are permitted under the
• controlling law, they may be included in determining whether jurisdictional
• amount is satisfied

• (a) In order to receive punitive damages… it must be
• proven that the Defendant’s conduct was “gross and wanton”

• (a) Plaintiff Viewpoint (Majority View)—consider
• only the value of the claim to plaintiff

(b) Point of view of the party seeking to invoke federal jurisdiction; Consider either plaintiff's viewpoint (value) brought in original federal court or defendant's viewpoint (cost) in case removed to federal court from state court

(c) Either Viewpoint-- calculate past losses and potential harm to each party



*Exam: make sure to apply all three approaches to a fact pattern!!!

• (1) One Plaintiff against One Defendant
• (perfectly fine w/ or w/o related claims)

• (2) One Plaintiff against Several Defendants
• (D must be jointly liable)

• (3) Multiple Plaintiffs v. One Defendant (Ps must have common title and undivided
• interest)

• *Not based on cause of action…
• but instead property ownership!!!!

• (4) Multiple Plaintiffs (w/ common title & undivided interest) v. Multiple D (w/ joint
• liability) is OK

• Federal courts decline to hear probate matters and
• domestic-relations cases and instead dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction

• (1) Family law matters are unique b/c states
• are better able to handle.
• (b) (Divorce, Alimony, or a child custody decree... is domestic-relations related to family matter)

• (2) Tort Exception: Federal courts will consider
• tort cases related to family however.

• ★There must be an original
• basis of being in federal court under § 1331(federal question) or 1332 (diversity) to use supplemental.

• Looks Like: *One claim w/ original basis, another claim w/ no ability to go to
• federal court alone*

§ 1367 (a) *mandatory : (1) original basis + (2) “same case or controversy”

• ·
• 1. Supplemental
• Jurisdiction is only applicable when there is an original basis for the case to be
• heard in federal court under 1331 (federal question jurisdiction) or
• 1332 (diversity jurisdiction)

2. Claims must be "so related to form part of the same case or controversy"

*Supplement jurisdiction not relevant b/c each claim has an original basis to go to federalcourt. ¨

No supplemental jurisdiction permitted because claim does not have original basis to go the federal court.

• § 1367 (b)—1332 diversity--*mandatory: Must
• have complete diversity

District Court does NOT have supplemental jurisdiction over claims by P against persons made parties under

• ·
• Rule 14 (3rd party practice- bringing in a 3rd party)

• ·
• Rule 19 (Required Joinder of
• Parties)

• ·
• Rule 20 (Permissive joinder
• of Parties)

• ·
• Rule 24 (Intervention-party
• coming into action)

AND inconsistent w/ 1332 requirements (must have complete diversity)

• 4 Cs at 1367(c):
• Complex (& novel)
• Claim (predominates)
• Claim (dismissed)
• Compelling (reasons)

1367 (c)--*discretionary: Discretion to retain or dismiss supplemental jurisdiction if:

1. Novel or complex state law

2. State claim substantially predominates

• 3. All federal claims dismissed (cases w/
• original jurisdiction)

4. Other compelling reasons

• (1) —(May); claim that a defendant may
• bring against a plaintiff.

• (a) Usually has no relation to the subject
• matter of the plaintiff's cause of action… can be brought at a different time.
• Judge has discretion to hear or not.

• (1) —(Must-“use it or lose it”); claim that
• a defendant must be brought or the defendant losses the opportunity to raise
• the issue at another time.

• (a) Usually part of the same case or controversy and is in response
• to plaintiff's suit or be barred so it must be resolved at the same time.