Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Law
Supplemental Jurisdiction Over Claims By Plaintiffs In Diversity Cases: Making Sense Of 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (B), Darren J. Gold
Supplemental Jurisdiction Over Claims By Plaintiffs In Diversity Cases: Making Sense Of 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (B), Darren J. Gold
Michigan Law Review
This Note examines the language and legislative history of section 1367(b) and proposes a uniform test for determining the circumstances in which subsection (b) authorizes the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction. Part I of this Note explains the doctrines of pendent and ancillary jurisdiction and examines how the Supreme Court's decision in Finley v. United States called these doctrines into question. Part II examines the language and legislative history of section 1367 and concludes that the statute only prohibits the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction over claims by plaintiffs in diversity cases when doing so would permit plaintiffs to circumvent the complete …
Transfer And Choice Of Federal Law: The Appellate Model, Robert A. Ragazzo
Transfer And Choice Of Federal Law: The Appellate Model, Robert A. Ragazzo
Michigan Law Review
In light of recent developments, a reexamination of the position that transferee federal law applies regardless of the context is in order. This article argues that the consensus that existed prior to the Marcus article and the Korean Air Lines case, although not based upon the most thorough analysis, comprises the better view: transferee federal law should apply after permanent but not MDL transfers.
Litigation And Inequality: Federal Diversity Jurisdiction In Industrial America, David A. Luigs
Litigation And Inequality: Federal Diversity Jurisdiction In Industrial America, David A. Luigs
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Litigation and Inequality: Federal Diversity Jurisdiction in Industrial America by Edward A. Purcell, Jr.
Continuing The Erie Debate: A Response To Westen And Lehman, Martin H. Redish
Continuing The Erie Debate: A Response To Westen And Lehman, Martin H. Redish
Michigan Law Review
Although the Supreme Court has not spoken in detail on the Erie doctrine since its much-discussed decision in Hanna v. Plumer in 1965, commentary on the doctrine in the literature has undergone something of a "boomlet" in the last several years. Much of it has been stimulated by the groundbreaking article by Professor John Hart Ely in 1974. The latest contribution to the area is the recent article by Professor Peter Westen and Mr. Jeffrey Lehman appearing earlier this year in this journal. Unfortunately, their article does little to advance analysis of the Erie question, and contains numerous fundamental misstatements …
After "Life For Erie--A Reply, Peter Westen
After "Life For Erie--A Reply, Peter Westen
Michigan Law Review
Erie, having "preoccupied the intellectually dominant group of academic lawyers rising to maturity during the 1940's and 1950's," is reported to be losing its "symbolic centrality" for the newest generation of legal scholars. Professor Redish's prompt and excited response to our essay proves one thing: there is at least one scholar in the country who, having come to legal maturity during the last decade, still remains capable of becoming impassioned about Erie RR v. Tompkins.
Is There Life For Erie After The Death Of Diversity?, Peter Westen, Jeffrey S. Lehman
Is There Life For Erie After The Death Of Diversity?, Peter Westen, Jeffrey S. Lehman
Michigan Law Review
This Article is essentially an elaboration of these three themes. Section I sets forth the fundamental principles, or "axioms," that determine whether a particular federal rule is pertinent and valid. Once these axioms are understood, it should become apparent that Erie problems, if not easy, are not uniquely difficult either; instead, they are the kinds of "ordinary" problems that are commonplace in other areas of law. Section II applies these axioms to cases in diversity to determine the validity of various kinds of federal rules of decision. Section III examines the validity of federal rules of decision in federal question …
Federal Procedure - Jurisdiction - Statutory Change In Jurisdictional Amount And Corporate Citizenship, Philip Belleville
Federal Procedure - Jurisdiction - Statutory Change In Jurisdictional Amount And Corporate Citizenship, Philip Belleville
Michigan Law Review
A recent congressional amendment of federal district court jurisdictional requirements for both diversity of citizenship and federal question litigation has raised the required amount in controversy from $3,000 to $10,000. The trial court has also been given discretion either to deny costs or assess them against the plaintiff if he is finally adjudged entitled to recover less than $10,000, determined without regard to any set-off or counterclaim and exclusive of interest and costs. Further, for purposes of diversity jurisdiction and removal, a corporation is now deemed a citizen "of any State by which it has been incorporated and of the …
Federal Practice - Venue - Applicability Of General Venue Satute To Defendant Brought Into A Case After Removal From The State Court, Nick E. Yocca S.Ed.
Federal Practice - Venue - Applicability Of General Venue Satute To Defendant Brought Into A Case After Removal From The State Court, Nick E. Yocca S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiffs, citizens of Missouri, originally brought suit in an Alabama state court against D1, a citizen of Virginia, and D2, a citizen of Minnesota, to recover for injuries sustained in an automobile accident which occurred in Alabama. After defendants had removed to the federal district court, plaintiffs amended their complaint to include D3, a citizen of Florida, service of process having been made in accordance with the Alabama nonresident motorist statute. By special appearance, D3 moved for dismissal because of improper venue. Held, motion granted and cause dismissed as to D3. While the original action was removed from the …
Federal Procedure - Jurisdiction - Minimal Diversity Permitted By The Federal Interpleader Act Satisfies Constitutional Requirements, Robert J. Hoerner
Federal Procedure - Jurisdiction - Minimal Diversity Permitted By The Federal Interpleader Act Satisfies Constitutional Requirements, Robert J. Hoerner
Michigan Law Review
A disinterested Texas bank brought a federal interpleader action under 28 U.S.C. (1952) §1335 against a Texas widow and four joint claimants, three of whom were Texas citizens and the other a Tennessee citizen. On appeal from a summary judgment for the joint claimants, the widow argued that the court lacked jurisdiction. Held, affirmed. Congress intended that section 1335 should cover these "minimal" facts. The "complete diversity'' requirement of Strawbridge v. Curtiss is only a rule of statutory construction and not a constitutional requirement. Haynes v. Felder, (5th Cir. 1957) 239 F. (2d) 868.
Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed
Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed
Michigan Law Review
Compulsory joinder cases involving interests in land display one peculiar and important characteristic: there is almost never any need in the state courts to wrestle with the question of whether a person is indispensable as distinguished from necessary. One hastens to add that this attribute of land cases appears to have gone largely unnoticed, but it exists none the less. It arises out of the fact that in a suit involving real property it is never impossible for the court to obtain jurisdiction over all persons interested therein to an extent which will enable the court to adjudicate controversies over …
Suits Against Unincorporated Associations Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, John Kaplan
Suits Against Unincorporated Associations Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, John Kaplan
Michigan Law Review
Concepts, Benjamin Cardozo has said, "are useful, indeed indispensable, if kept within their place. We will press them quite a distance. . . . A time comes, however, when the concepts carry us too far, or farther than we are ready to go with them, and behold, some other concept, with capacity to serve our needs is waiting at the gate. 'It is a peculiar virtue of our system of law that the process of inclusion and exclusion, so often employed in developing a rule, is not allowed to end with its enunciation, and that an expression in an opinion …
Federal Procedure - Jurisdiction - Suit Under Direct Action Statute Where There Is Diversity Of Citizenship Between Claimant And Insurer But Not Between Claimant And Wrongdoer, William R. Jentes
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff, a citizen of Louisiana, was injured in an automobile accident allegedly caused by the negligence of another citizen of Louisiana. Defendant insurance company, an Illinois corporation, had issued a public liability policy insuring the latter against claims arising from the negligent operation of his car. Pursuant to a Louisiana statutory provision that "the injured person or his or her heirs, at their option, shall have a right of direct action . . . against the insurer alone or against both the insured and the insurer, jointly and in solido,'' respondent brought an action against the petitioner alone in the …
Federal Procedure - Realignment Of Parties In Non-Diversity Case, David D. Dowd, Jr S.Ed.
Federal Procedure - Realignment Of Parties In Non-Diversity Case, David D. Dowd, Jr S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff (S1), a surety for the subcontractor, brought an action against the subcontractor and the prime contractor to compel them to set off their respective counterclaims in order to diminish the liability of S1. The subcontractor had another surety (S2) on a different obligation arising out of the same construction job, and the prime contractor, uncertain where liability should be placed, impleaded S2. On S1's motion to vacate the impleader order, held, denied, and the court on its own motion directed realignment of the parties, ruling that the main issue was division of …