FEDERAL JURISDICTION OUTLINE

Personal Jurisdiction
- Federal cts need PJ over Ds.
- Assessed the same way as in NY Practice.

Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Federal cts can only hear: (1) diversity cases (including alienage); and (2) cases involving a fed question.
- Diversity and Alienage: (1) action must be btwn citizens of different states or btwn a citizen of a state and citizen of
a foreign country; and (2) amount in controversy must exceed $75,000.
o Citizenship Requirement:
 There is no diversity of citizenship if any P is a citizen of the same state as any D.
 Alienage is btwn a citizen of a state and an alien (not btwn two ppl from diff countries outside
US). An alien admitted to US for permanent residence is treated as a citizen of state in which she
is domiciled. A US citizen is a citizen of state in which she is domiciled, so if domiciled in a
foreign country, then not an alien.
 Domicile – is physical presence in state AND intent to make that state your permanent home
(subjective intent inquiry). Person can have no more than one domicile at a time, so you always
retain your old domicile until requirements are met with respect to a new one. Treat DC as a state.
 Diversity – The test for diversity is at the time the case is filed. So, a subsequent change in a
party’s citizenship is irrelevant, and it’s irrelevant what their citizenships were when claim arose.
 Corporations – citizenship is not “domicile” it is: (1) all states where incorporated (usually only
one); AND (2) one state where the corp has its principal place of business (PPB), so a corp can be
a citizen of more than one state at a time, but no matter how big the corp is, it only has one PPB.
Test for PPB is: (1) headquarters (nerve center, where decisions are made) OR (2) major
production or service activity (muscle center). Generally, cts consider the nerve center as PPB
unless all business activity is in one state.
 Unincorporated associations (e.g., partnerships, labor unions, LLCs) look to citizenship of all
members, not at PPB, etc. For partnerships that include general & limited partners, then
citizenship in all their states.
 Decedents, minors, and incompetents – citizenship of person being represented, not the rep.
 Class actions are different.
o Amount in Controversy Requirement:
 Need good faith allegation claim in complaint alone exceeds $75K exclusive of interests & costs
 Whatever P claims in good faith ok unless clear to legal certainty P can’t recover more than $75K
 What P wins is irrelevant to jurisdiction if she recovers less than $75K, she may be liable to D for
D’s litigation costs though.
 Aggregation – where P must add 2 or more claims to meet amount in controversy requirement, as
long as one P vs. one D, you can aggregate all claims you want and they don’t have to be in any
way related, but P can’t aggregate claims where diff Ds. For joint claims, use the total value of the
claim – number of parties irrelevant.
 For injunctions, look from P’s viewpoint, whether the encroachment hurt P by more than $75K or
from D’s viewpoint, whether it would cost D more than $75K to comply w/ injunction, then
requirement is met.
o Even if requirements for diversity are met, fed cts will not hear cases involving issuance of divorce,
alimony or child custody decree, and will not probate a decedent’s estate.
o No SMJ when party has been improperly or collusively made or joined to invoke jurisdiction – assignment
to create diversity, e.g. – no diversity of citizenship if party is a mere collection agent for party w/ no real
interest in case.
- Federal question: Complaint must show right or interest founded substantially on federal law – must “arise under”
federal law – not as popular as diversity, but shows up. Citizenship of parties & amt in controversy are irrelevant.
o Some FQ cases have exclusive fed jur, so can only be brought in fed ct, but most don’t and can be brought
in state or fed ct. (e.g., patent infringement & some federal securities law cases).
o Well pleaded complaint rule – if complaint were well-pleaded, just stating P’s claim w/o extraneous
material, then federal if P is enforcing a federal right, otherwise no (they will give you the law).

1
 - Must assess whether each claim individually invokes diversity or FQ for it to be included in case. If not, then
supplemental jurisdiction can allow the fed ct to hear the claim, but have to have at least one claim in case already
that satisfied diversity or FQ for fed ct. For supp jur, ask, does the claim share a common nucleus of operative fact
w/ the underlying case? This test is always met if the claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence as the
underlying case, even if it is against a second D (pendent party).
o Limitations: Supp jur cannot be used for a claim by a P in a diversity case to overcome the complete
diversity rule, but okay to overcome amount in controversy req’t, and limitation n/a in FQ cases and P can
use supplemental jurisdiction to overcome a lack of amount in controversy for claims by Ps in diversity
cases (new law) if: (1) meets T/O; (2) limitation doesn’t apply b/c P is not trying to overcome a lack of
diversity; any other party can use supp jur to overcome either lack of complete diversity or amount in
controversy in any case (diversity or FQ)
o Discretionary Factors: The ct has discretion not to hear a supplemental claim – (1) if FQ dismissed early in
proceedings (before trial) or (2) state law claim is complex or (3) state law issues predominate.
- Removal allows Ds to have case filed in state ct removed to fed ct embracing state ct in which originally filed.
o Case is removable if it could have been filed in fed ct, meaning it meets diversity, alienage or FQ.
o Case must be removed w/in 30 days of service of first removable pleading, usually at outset w/ service of
process, but might become removable for first time later.
 All Ds must agree for removal to occur. If there is a separate and independent FQ claim against
one D, he can remove the whole case, but ct can remand state law issues. P can never remove. In
diversity cases (not FQ), no removal if D is a citizen of the forum. If P then dismisses claim
against citizen of forum D, then becomes removable and remaining D has 30 days from service of
dismissal of D-2 to remove, but in a diversity of citizenship case, no removal more than 1 yr after
case filed in state ct.
o Procedural Removal – D must file notice of removal in fed ct, setting forth grounds of removal, signed
under Rule 11, attach all docs served on D in state action, copy to all adverse parties, then D files copy of
notice of removal in state ct. If removal improper, P moves to remand to state ct, must do so w/in 30 days
if based on defect other than SMJ. Ct must remand anytime it finds no fed jur. A D who files a permissive
counterclaim in state ct probably waives right to remove. A D who files a compulsory counterclaim in state
ct probably does not waive the right to remove.
- Erie Doctrine: in diversity cases (and supp jur claims), fed ct must apply state substantive law.
o To determine what is substantive ask: (1) is it an easy issue (elements of claim or defense, SOL, rules for
tolling SOL, choice of law rules); or (2) ask is there some federal law (like a statute or FRCP or FRE) on
point that directly conflicts w/ the state law? If so, apply the federal law as long as it’s valid b/c the
supremacy clause. FRCP is valid if arguably procedural – none ever held invalid.
o If no fed law on point, apply 3 tests: (1) outcome determinative – would applying or ignoring the state rule
affect the outcome of the case? (If so, probably substantive); (2) Balance of interests – does either fed or
state system have strong interest in having its rule applied? (strong federal interest in having jury decide
fact questions, contrary state law won’t be followed unless very strong state interest); (3) avoid forum
shopping (if fed judge doesn’t follow state law on this point, will it cause litigants to flock to fed ct? If so,
should probably apply state law – don’t want to give this incentive to forum shop).

Venue
- After deciding to sue in fed ct in particular state, issue of which fed dist to sue in. A case removed from state ct goes
only to fed dist embracing that state ct, rules are for cases originally filed in fed ct.
o In any case, P may lay venue in any dist where all Ds reside or a substantial part of the claim arose (if no
dist anywhere in US meets either of these, then in diversity of citizenship cases, any dist where any D is
subject to PJ, or in FQ cases, any dist where any D is found). If Ds reside in diff districts of same state,
venue is proper in dist where any one of the Ds resides.
- Residence: Individuals – residence usually equals domicile. Corporation resides in all dists where subject to PJ
when case is filed (don’t confuse corp’s citizenship for diversity jurisdiction).
- Actions re: ownership, possession or injury to land (inc trespass) must be filed in dist where land lies.
- Transfer of venue: from one fed dist ct to another. Case can only be transferred to another fed dist that: (1) has PJ
over the D and (2) is proper venue (these two things must be true w/o waiver by D).
o If venue in original forum is proper, may transfer to another fed dist ct, looking to: (1) convenience of
parties; (2) convenience of witnesses; (3) interests in justice.
 If a case is transferred under this statute, choice of law rules that apply are those of the original ct.

2
 o If venue in original forum is improper, ct may transfer in interests of justice or dismiss.

Service of Process
Deliver to D: (1) a summons (formal ct notice of suit and time for response) and (2) a copy of the complaint. These are
called “process”; must be served w/in 120 days of filing complaint or else case will be dismissed w/o prejudice (not if P
shows good cause delay in serving).
- Any non-party who is at least 18 may serve process.
- Fed dist ct may use any method of service permitted by: (1) FRCP or (2) law of state in which it sits or (3) law of
state in which service is effected.
o Personal Service – Papers given to D personally, anywhere in forum state, need not be in home or office.
o Substituted Service – ok if: (1) D’s usual abode; & (2) serve person suitable age & discretion residing there
o Agent – process can be delivered to agent authorized to receive service for D (corp’s agent could be
registered agent or managing agent or officer; litigant can appoint agent; or agent can be appointed by
operation of law).
o Waiver by mail – Process mailed to D by 1st class mail, postage prepaid allowed if D returns waiver form
w/in 30 days, waiving service but nothing else (like PJ or venue). If no return of waiver form, P must have
D served either personally or by substituted service, and penalty on D is that she may have to pay the cost
of the service if she doesn’t waive service.
o Geographic limitation – A fed ct in NY can serve process in NY only if a NY state ct could – PJ same in
fed ct and state ct. Two minor exceptions: (1) Bulge Rule; and (2) Statutory Interpleader (see below).

Joinder of Parties & Claims

Parties – Proper parties who may be joined:
- Ps may sue together if claims arise from same T/O AND raise at least one common question. Then, have to see if
case gets into fed ct by diversity, FQ or supp.
- Necessary or required parties: absentees – persons not originally in the suit – who should be forced into the pending
case b/c necessary.
o First assess who is a necessary party: If any of these 3, ct can order joinder: (1) w/o absentee cannot accord
complete relief among those already joined (worried about multiple suits); (2) absentee’s interest will be
harmed if he isn’t joined (practical harm); or (3) absentee claims an interest which subjects a party (usually
D) to possibility of multiple obligations. Joint tortfeasors are not necessary.
o Second, assess whether the necessary party can be joined, meaning (1) is there PJ over them and (2) can
they be joined w/o messing up diversity. If so, join them.
o Third, if can’t be joined, then only two choices: (1) proceed w/o party, or (2) dismiss pending case
o In determining which option to take, ct balances: (1) is there an alternative forum available where everyone
can be joined (even state ct)? (2) What is the real likelihood of harm to anybody if we proceed w/o the
party? (3) Can the ct do something to shape the order in the pending case to avoid any such harm? If ct
dismisses, party is “indispensable.”

Claims by Defendant
- Counterclaim: an offensive claim against an opposing party (someone who already sued you). The best example is
a claim by D against P. Counterclaim is filed w/ D’s answer. Two types:
o (1) Compulsory – one that arises from same T/O as P’s claim. Must be filed w/ your answer in pending
case or else waived. D cannot use on claim in separate case.
o (2) Permissive – doesn’t arise from same T/O as P’s claim. Doesn’t have to be asserted in pending case.
o For every claim asserted in fed ct, must assess whether fed SMJ, so need to check whether counterclaim is
supported by diversity or alienage or FQ jurisdiction. If so, can be filed in pending case. The second circuit
has even upheld jurisdiction over a permissive counterclaim if it has loose factual connection w/ P’s claim.
- Cross-claim: is an offensive claim against a co-party, may be filed if arises from same T/O as underlying action, not
compulsory. To assert, party should filed compulsory counterclaim against P, b/c against opposing party and arises
from same T/O as claim; then party may file a cross-claim against D (b/c against a co-party and arises from same
T/O as underlying case).
- Tip: If claim starts w/ “C,” (counter-claim, cross-claim) then btwn existing parties, if “I,” (impleader, intervention)
then someone new is joining case.

3
 - Interpleader (third-party practice): Defending party joins 3rd party D b/c TPD is or might be liable to defending
party for claim against defending party, usually a claim for indemnity or contribution. D has right to implead w/in
10 days of serving answer or else need ct permission to implead.
o Must: (1) file 3rd party complaint naming TPD and (2) serve process on TPD (so ct needs PJ).
o After TPD is joined, TPD can assert claim against P if it arises from same T/O as underlying case. After
TPD is joined, P can assert claim against TPD if it arises from same T/O as underlying case.
o Subject Matter Jurisdiction – after determining claims asserted, each one has to be assessed for SMJ (try
diversity, alienage, fed jur. If none met, try supp jur).
- Bulge Rule – Absentees joined as necessary parties or under impleader may be served w/ process out of state
regardless of state law w/in 100 miles of ct house in which case is pending. Not available for serving process on
original Ds.

Special Multiparty Joinder Situations

- Intervention: Absentee wants to join a pending suit. She chooses whether to intervene as a P or as a D. The ct can
realign her if she came in on the wrong side. Application to intervene must be timely.
o Intervention of right – Need: (1) Absentee’s interest may be harmed if not joined; AND (2) interest harmed
if not adequately represented now (basically same as test #2 for necessary parties).
o Permissive intervention – A’s claim or defense and pending case have at least one common question.
Allowing intervention here is discretionary w/ the ct. If diversity of citizenship case and intervention will
mess up diversity, supp jury generally not available for permissive or intervention of right.
o SMJ – assesses whether claim by intervenor P or against intervenor D invokes SMJ
- Interpleader: one holding money or property wants to force all potential claimants into a single case to avoid
multiple litigation and the threat of inconsistent results. Person holding property is stakeholder and those who want
property are claimants.
o In fed ct two types: “rule” and “statutory” – in each, stakeholder not sure who owns the property (maybe he
thinks it’s his), and wants to avoid being sued several diff times about it. In each type, ct may issue an
injunction stopping parties from litigating ownership Q in another ct. The two types, though, have diff
standards for jurisdiction, venue and service of process. Rule interpleader is just treated as a regular
diversity case.
o Citizenship – To determine diversity of citizenship, under the rule, stakeholder must be diverse from every
claimant, but statute is radically different. Under the statute, one claimant must be diverse from one other
claimant. Don’t even look at stakeholder’s citizenship.
o Amount in controversy – under rule, must exceed $75K; under statute, just need $500 or more.
o Service of process – under rule, reg service of process rules; under statute, nationwide service of process.
o Venue – under the rule, regular venue rules, like any case, under the statute, lay venue in dist where any
claimant resides.
o Some cases are both statutory and rule interpleader and some are only one and some are neither.
- Class Actions: Representative sues on behalf of group.
o Need: (1) too numerous for practicable joinder; (2) some Qs of law or fact in common to the class; (3)
representative’s claims/defenses typical of those of the class; and (4) representative will fairly and
adequately represent class.
o Case must fit w/in one of three types of class actions: (1) Prejudice (class treatment is nec to avoid harm
either to class members or the party opposing the class; ex: numerous claimants to a fund, individual suits
would deplete the fund, leaving some w/o a remedy); (2) Injunction or declaratory judgment (not damages)
sought b/c class members were treated alike by other party (ex: employment discrim); (3) Damages (show:
(a) common questions predominate over individual questions; and (b) class action is superior method for
resolving dispute (ex: mass tort)).
o Ct must determine at early practicable time whether to certify case to proceed as class action, if ct certifies
class, must define class and class claims, issues, or defenses and appoint a class counsel, who must fairly
and adequately represent interests of the class.
o Does ct notify class of pendency of class action? In type 3, ct must notify (often by mail) all reasonable
identifiable members, telling them various thing, including (a) they can opt out; (b) binding effect of a class
judgment on class members; and (c) they can enter a separate appearance through counsel (no such notice
is required in type 1 or type 2 classes). Who pays to give this notice? The representative.
o All class members are bound by the class action judgment except those who opt out of a type 3 class.

4
 o In all 3 types, there can be no settlement or dismissal of class claims in certified class w/o ct approval. Ct
gives notice to class members to get feedback on whether case should be settled or dismissed. If Type 3
class, must give members second chance to opt out.
o SMJ – class might invoke FQ jur by asserting claim arising under federal law; we don’t care about
citizenship or amount in controversy, but if class seeks to invoke diversity of citizenship jurisdiction,
citizenship of representative only is relevant on class side if representative is diverse from every D. To
determine amount in controversy in diversity class action look at representative only, if her claim exceeds
$75K, then we are okay.
o Class Action Fairness Act – allows federal subject matter if: (1) any class member is diverse from any D;
and (2) there are at least 100 class members; and (3) the aggregate amount in controversy exceeds $5 mil.
Any D, rather than all Ds required under diversity can remove to fed ct; can be removed even if D is a
citizen of the forum (many reasons not to allow removal…see CMR.

Trial, Judgment, & Post-Trial Motions

Jury Trial
- Juries resolve disputes of fact, ct instructs jury on the law.
- 7th amendment preserves right to jury trial in fed ct in actions at law, but not equity, if case involves law & equity,
jury must determine factual issues underlying law, but not equity claim. Generally, they try the jury issues first.
Does not apply in state cts, only in civil cases in fed cts.
- Requirement of demand: must demand jury trial in writing no later than 10 days after svc of last pleading raising a
jury triable issue. May demand in a pleading or separate doc.
- In selecting the jury, each side has unlimited strikes of potential jurors for cause and each side gets 3 peremptory
strikes, but must not be used in race & gender neutral way b/c jury selection in state action, so you cannot engage in
race or gender based pre-emption.
- Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL) (directed verdict) – exceptional order, effect of which is to take
case from jury. It is brought after the other side has been heard, so D can move at the close of P’s evidence and
again at the close of all evidence. Standard for granting motion is so clear and overwhelming that reasonable ppl
could not disagree on the result. In ruling on this motion, the ct generally will view the evidence in the light most
favorable to the nonmoving party.
- Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict) (JNOV) (RJMOL) –
judge lets case go to jury – jury returns verdict for one party and ct enters judgment on basis of that verdict. Now,
losing party files renewed motion for judgment as mater of law, if granted, results in entry of judgment for him –
must move not later than 10 days after entry of judgment. The standard is the same as JMOL – reasonable ppl
couldn’t disagree and generally, the ct will view the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, so
if this is granted, the jury reached a conclusion reasonable ppl could not have reached. Motion for judgment as a
matter of law at the close of all evidence is a prerequisite. If you did not move for the judgment as matter of law at
the close of all evidence, you cannot make the renewed motion.
- Motion for New Trial: Judgment entered, but judge concludes errors at trial require a new trial, must move not later
than 10 days after entry of judgment (ex: prejudicial error at trial makes judgment unfair; new evidence that could
not have been discovered in time for trial; prejudicial misconduct of party or juror; judgment against weight of
evidence, showing serious error of judgment by jury) Comparison of new trial to renewed motion for judgment as
matter of law – granting new trial is less radical since results in starting over.

Pleadings
- Defensive Responses: Under FRCP 12, defending party may respond by: (1) motion; or (2) answer, no later than 20
days after service of process on her.
o Answer is a pleading: in it, D does two things: (1) responds to allegations of complaint (admitting, denying,
or, when appropriate, saying D lacks sufficient info to admit or deny) and (2) raises affirmative defenses.
o Motions are not technically pleadings: they ask ct to order something such as to require P to make a more
definite statement (rule 12(e)) or ordering that a pleading or portion thereof be stricken (rule 12(f)), or that
the case be dismissed for any of a variety of reasons.
o 7 defenses can be raised either in the answer or by motion: (1) lack of SMJ; (2) lack of PJ; (3) improper
venue; (4) insufficient process (problem w/ docs); (5) insufficient svc of process; (6) failure to state a claim

5
 on which relief can be granted; (7) failure to join an indispensable party. To raise 2, 3, 4, and 5, must be
put in 1st rule 12 response (answer or motion) or else waived (waiveable defense). Numbers 6 & 7: can be
raised anytime through trial; Number 1: never waived can be raised anytime in case even on appeal.
- Notice Pleading: complaint must contain: (1) statement of SMJ; (2) short and plain statement of claim, showing
entitled to relief; and (3) demand for judgment. Demand for judgment doesn’t limit what can be recovered except in
default cases. W/ a pro se litigant (one representing herself, w/o a lawyer), ct is usually more lenient, but these reqts
must be met. Statement of claim need not be stated w/ great specificity or particularity. The federal rules use what
is often called “notice pleading” under which the pleading is sufficient if it puts the other side on notice – don’t
have to plead all facts, just enough for notice. 3 exceptions: fraud, mistake, & special damages (those that do not
normally flow from an event).