Introductory Paragraph
Federal courts are courts of limited subject matter jurisdiction (SMJ). Generally, a plaintiff's cause of action must be based on a federal question or on diversity of citizenship for a federal court to have SMJ.
Federal Question Jurisdiction (2001)
A federal question exists when plaintiff sues to vindicate a federal right, often under a federal statute or the Constitution.
Diversity of Citizenship SMJ (2001)
For a federal court to have SMJ based on diversity, each plaintiff must be diverse from each defendant and the amount in controversy must exceed $75,000.
Amount in Controversy-Aggregation of Claims (2001)
A plaintiff may only aggregate claims against multiple defendants if they are joint tortfeasors.
Amount in Controversy-Injunction (2001)
An injunction may be valued by either the value of the benefit to plaintiff or the cost of compliance for defendant.
Individual Citizenship (2001)
An individual is a citizen of the state of her domicile. Domicile is determined by physical residence combined with intent to make the state a permanent home.
Corporate Citizenship (2001)
A corporation's citizenship includes its state of incorporation and the state in which it has its principal place of business.
Venue (2001)
In a diversity case, venue is proper in any district where all defendants reside; or where a substantial part of the claim arose; or, if neither is possible, any district where any defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction.
Residence (2001)
A corporation resides where it is subject to personal jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is proper under traditional bases, such as presence or citizenship in a state, or under minimum contacts analysis, in which the exercise of jurisdiction would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
Final Judgment (2001)
A case can only be appealed from a final judgment on the merits in the lower court.
Interrocutory Appeal (2001)
A party may appeal before a final judgment on certain matters by right, such as a granting of an injunction, or if the lower court certifies that the issue isa close one and the appellate court agrees.
Erie Doctrine (2002)
Under Erie, in such a case, the federal court must use federal procedural law and state substantive law.
Amended Pleadings
Relation back doctrine
Claims: Same conduct, transaction, or occurrence
Defendants
Same conduct, transaction, or occurrence
New Party knew
Would have been named