Jurisdiction Commons^™

Undemocratic Restraint, Fred O. Smith, Jr.

Vanderbilt Law Review

For almost two hundred years, a basic tenet of American law has been that federal courts must generally exercise jurisdiction when they possess it. And yet, self-imposed prudential limits on judicial power have, at least until recently, roared on despite these pronouncements. The judicial branch's avowedly self-invented doctrines include some (though not all) aspects of standing, ripeness, abstention, and the political question doctrine. The Supreme Court recently, and unanimously, concluded that prudential limits are in severe tension with our system of representative democracy because they invite policy determinations from unelected judges. Even with these pronouncements, however, the Court has not …

Agencies' Obligation To Interpret The Statute, Aaron Saiger

Vanderbilt Law Review

Conventionally, when a statute delegates authority to an agency, courts defer to agency interpretations of that statute. Most agencies and scholars view such deference as a grant of permission to the agency to adopt any reasonable interpretation. That is wrong, jurisprudentially and ethically. An agency that commands deference bears a duty to adopt what it believes to be the best interpretation of the relevant statute. Deference assigns to the agency, rather than to a court, power authoritatively to declare what the law is. That power carries with it a duty to give the statute the best reading the agency can. …

A Tale Of Two Jurisdictions, Alan M. Trammell

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Supreme Court has recently clarified one corner of personal jurisdiction-a court's power to hale a defendant into court-and pointed the way toward a coherent theory of the rest of the doctrine. For nearly seventy years, the Court has embraced two theories of when jurisdiction over a defendant is permissible. The traditional theory, general jurisdiction, authorizes jurisdiction when there is a tight connection between the defendant and the forum. The modern theory, specific jurisdiction, focuses more on the connection between the lawsuit itself and the forum. Although the two theories should have developed in tandem, the doctrine has become a …

In Search Of The Probate Exception, James E. Pfander, Michael J.T. Downey

Vanderbilt Law Review

As a limit on the power of Article III courts, the probate exception has surely earned its place in the old curiosity shop of federal jurisdictional law. Dating from the early nineteenth century, the exception has been said to derive from various sources, including the lack of federal jurisdiction over ecclesiastical matters, the "law" and "equity" limits of Article III, and the structure of our federal government. The Supreme Court's 2006 decision in Marshall v. Marshall sought to clarify matters, but lower courts continue to debate the breadth of the exception. In this Article, we go in search of the …

On The Efficient Deployment Of Rules And Standards To Define Federal Jurisdiction, Jonathan R. Nash

Vanderbilt Law Review

Congress and the federal courts have traditionally adopted rules, as opposed to standards, to establish the boundaries of federal district court jurisdiction. More recently, the Supreme Court has strayed from this path in two areas: federal question jurisdiction and admiralty jurisdiction. Commentators have generally supported the use of discretion in determining federal question jurisdiction, but they have not recognized the relationship to the rule-standard distinction, nor more importantly have they considered the importance of where discretion enters the jurisdictional calculus. This Article argues that predictability and efficiency make it normatively desirable to have rules predominate jurisdictional boundaries and thus to …

Cooperative Interbranch Federalism: Certification Of State-Law Questions By Federal Agencies, Verity Winship

Vanderbilt Law Review

When an unresolved state-law question arises in federal court, the court may certify it to the relevant state court. The practice of certification from one court to another has been widely adopted and has been touted as "help[ing] build a cooperative judicial federalism." This Article proposes that states promote cooperative interbranch federalism by allowing federal agencies to certify unresolved state-law questions to state courts. It draws on Delaware's recent expansion of potential certifying entities to the Securities and Exchange Commission to argue that this innovation should be extended to other states and other federal agencies. Certification from federal agencies to …

A Unified Theory Of 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Jurisdiction, Lumen N. Mulligan

Vanderbilt Law Review

Section 1331, Title 28 of the United States Code is the general federal question jurisdictional statute, which grants federal district courts with original subject matter jurisdiction over "all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."' This statute grounds the majority of civil actions heard in federal court. Given the weighty doctrinal3 and pragmatic consequences that flow from determining whether a claim falls within the scope of § 1331, it is surprising to learn that we lack a coherent view of what statutory federal question jurisdiction entails. Professor Mishkin famously forwarded the classic theory that …

Constructing Alternative Avenues Of Jurisdictional Protection: Bypassing Burnham's Roadblock Via § 1404(A), Phillip F. Cramer

Vanderbilt Law Review

A plaintiff from Maine sues an insurance company, incorporated in Maine and having its principal place of business in Maine, on a loss incurred in Maine under a contract negotiated, written, and executed in Maine. The plaintiff files the suit in Alabama to take advantage of its liability law, its statute of limitations, its juries, its rules of evidence, and its posture toward plaintiffs. The plaintiff serves a representative of the insurance company traveling in Alabama en route to an industry convention. For all the reasons the plaintiff seeks a forum in Alabama, the defendant wishes to avoid that forum. …

The Demise Of Hypothetical Jurisdiction In The Federal Courts, Scott C. Idleman

Vanderbilt Law Review

Recent years have witnessed a modest but expanding Supreme Court effort to return the national government to its structural first principles.' Foremost among these is that federal power, although vast, is neither inherent nor unbounded, but consists only of that granted by the Constitution. In 1998, the Court remained steadfast to this precept, thwarting yet another attempt by a federal branch to exceed its limited and enumerated constitutional powers. This time, however, the perpetrator was none other than the Article IH judiciary itself. In Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, the Court formally denounced the federal court practice …

Beyond "Marbury": Jurisdictional Self-Dealing In "Seminole Tribe", Laura S. Fitzgerald

Vanderbilt Law Review

In Seminole Tribe v. Florida, the Supreme Court held that the Constitution's Article III embodies a principle of state sovereign immunity which so constrains the federal judicial power that it prohibits Congress from granting federal courts subject matter jurisdiction over private lawsuits to enforce Article I legislation against states. At the same time, however, and again in Idaho v. Coeur d'Alene Tribe, the Court reaffirmed its own Ex parte Young doctrine, under which the Court itself unilaterally granted federal courts subject matter jurisdiction over private lawsuits to coerce states to comply with federal law despite state sovereign immunity. Neither in …

Ashley V. Abbott Laboratories: Reconfiguring The Personal Jurisdiction Analysis In Mass Tort Litigation, Julia C. Bunting

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Supreme Court has struggled for over one hundred years to articulate a workable standard for determining whether a court may exercise personal jurisdiction, over a defendant without violating the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Despite a substantial body of precedent, the Court has been unable to enunciate a consistent, intelligible test to govern personal jurisdiction. The Court's pronouncements swing between two bases: the territoriality, sovereignty, and power concerns established by Pennoyer v. Neff, and the defendant-centered fairness analysis announced in International Shoe Co. v. Washington. As a result of this inconsistency, lower courts adhere to vastly different …

Removal, Remand, And Review In Pendent Claim And Pendent Party Cases, Joan Steinman

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Article examines the removability of civil actions that include either pendent claims or pendent parties joined in addition to parties against whom federal questions are alleged. It discusses the remandability of those civil actions or segments of them, and comments on the law governing appellate review of district court remands to state court.' In an effort to reach the wisest resolutions of the various issues posed, it confronts issues of statutory construction, interprets Supreme Court cases, especially Thermtron Products, Inc. v. Hermansdorfer,'and wades in the murky waters of federalism. In the course of this enterprise, the Article analyzes and …

Considering New Issues On Appeal: The General Rule And The Gorilla Rule, Robert J. Martineau

Vanderbilt Law Review

One aspect of the appellate process that most bedevils judges and lawyers occurs when a party attempts to raise an issue in the appellate court that it did not present to the trial court. This question creates problems for the following reasons: (1) the general rule against considering new issues on appeal; (2) the perception that it is unfair to the appellant if the new issue is not considered, yet it is unfair to the appellee if the new issue is considered; and (3) the failure or inability of appellate courts to articulate any principled basis for determining when and …

A Brave New World For Personal Jurisdiction: Flexible Tests Under Uniform Standards, Harold S. Lewis, Jr.

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Article accepts the challenge to unify personal jurisdiction theory by proposing an approach that accommodates both the contacts-based and noncontacts-based tests under uniform jurisdictional standards. The analysis builds on the major assumption,elaborated in part II, that the Supreme Court's decision in Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee removed the principal barrier to a unified theory by ousting governmental interests from their long held place in personal jurisdiction decisions. The principal thesis is that International Shoe has made two general, lasting contributions to jurisdictional theory.First, International Shoe recognized, although less clearly than Ireland, that the goal …

Cable Television's Emerging Two-Way Services: A Dilemma For Federal And State Regulators, Frank W. Lloyd

Vanderbilt Law Review

Cable television as an entertainment medium has been the subject of various federal, state, and local regulatory schemes since its inception in the 1950's. The introduction of nonvideo two-way cable services that provide a capacity for responsive data and voice transmission between users of the two-way system has renewed interest in the appropriate role of government in the regulation of two-way cable services. Telephone companies in particular have pressed state and federal regulators to identify cable two-way systems as common carriers and to impose on them two-way cable common carrier regulations. In this Article Mr. Frank Lloyd discusses actual and …

Judicial Jurisdiction: From A Contacts To An Interest Analysis, Luther L. Mcdougal L. Mcdougal Iii

Vanderbilt Law Review

This Article examines whether the courts should shift their focus to a policy or interest analysis in judicial jurisdiction cases. The Article initially identifies some of the theoretical inadequacies of, and practical difficulties with, the Supreme Court's purposefully availing/minimum contacts approach to jurisdictional problems. The Article then outlines an alternative approach that employs a comprehensive form of interest analysis. After setting forth this proposed framework, the Article proceeds to examine Supreme Court decisions since International Shoe from the standpoint of the outcomes that an interest analysis approach might produce. Finally, the Article appraises these varying results and recommends that the …

Expanding Jurisdiction Of The Federal Power Commission And The Problem Of Federal-State Conflict, William A. Campbell

Vanderbilt Law Review

After exploring federal-state conflicts in the granting of licenses for hydro-electric projects, it is clear that, thus far, the FPC has won most of the disputes; and this is not altogether bad, for there are certainly legitimate national interests to be protected here. But there are also legitimate state interests to be protected, not out of concern for the preservation of federalism as a political theory, but because the state is the political unit with the primary concern and responsibility for certain matters and because it can administer and regulate those matters with a higher degree of effectiveness than can …

Expanded Bases Of Jurisdiction -- An Examination Of Tennessee's New "Long-Arm" Statute, Harry G. Nichol, Jr.

Vanderbilt Law Review

A foreign corporation considering the consequences of its activity in relation to forums outside the state of its incorporation is faced with three basic legal problems. They are generally regarded as the different degrees of "doing business" for purposes of (1) qualification,(2) taxation, and (3) judicial jurisdiction. The purpose of this paper is to discuss a major recent development concerning the jurisdiction of Tennessee courts, in light of similar developments throughout the country.

Book Notes, Law Review Staff

Vanderbilt Law Review

In his discussion of the traditional power framework within which the Supreme Court operates the author covers old ground, dealing with such matters as the jurisdictional limitations upon the Court, its law court function of making case by case determinations, and its self-imposed restraints as to when and how it will hear and determine a controversy. The second broad heading, entitled "Marshalling the Court," forms probably the most fascinating chapter in the book. The author is here concerned with the issue most vital to any policy-oriented Justice: How can he win and hold for his side at least four other …

Conflict Of Laws -- 1961 Tennessee Survey (Ii), Elliott E. Cheatham

Vanderbilt Law Review

Jurisdiction of courts over foreign corporations is a developing subject. Almost all aspects of it are touched on by decision or discussion in two cases in different courts and under different statutes; one case was in the Supreme Court of Tennessee, the other in the United States district court.

=================================

Tucker v. International Salt Co. was an action in a state court in contract and quasi-contract against a Pennsylvania corporation.

=================================

Shuler v. Wood was an action in tort in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee against two Pennsylvania corporations.

Equity -- 1961 Tennessee Survey (Ii), T. A. Smedley

Vanderbilt Law Review

During the current survey period, each of the higher Tennessee courts has been called upon to exercise its injunctive powers in significant and perplexing types of controversies. The court of appeals for the western section had to decide whether to take the risk of interfering in a bitter dispute between opposing factions of a church which had been torn by interfraternal strife for several years. In the middle section court of appeals an injunction was sought to restrain a store owner from operating his business under the name of a former manager of the store who had left this position …

Conflict Of Laws -- 1961 Tennessee Survey, Elliott E. Cheatham

Vanderbilt Law Review

1. Non-Resident Motorists.-The statute subjecting non-residents to suit in Tennessee for injuries inflicted within the state has been extended by interpretation to non-resident parents who join in their minor child's application for a driver's license.

2. Watercraft.-The principle of the non-resident motorists statutes has been applied to watercraft by a statute entitled "Operation of watercraft in state as appointment of agent for process."

III. Support In Thomas v. Thomas a woman had been granted a divorce in Tennessee and custody of the children of the marriage, with a decree of support for the children against the father but with it …

Recent Cases, Law Review Staff

Vanderbilt Law Review

Bankruptcy--Assets--Trustee's Rights Under 70(c) Ascertained at Date of Bankruptcy Rather than Anterior Point of Time

====================================

Contempt--Publisher Not in Contempt for Newspaper Articles Which He reasonably did not believe would interfere with Trial

====================================

Federal Procedure--Erie Doctrine--Impeachment Evidence not Outcome--Determinative

=====================================

Jurisdiction--Federal Death on High Seas Act Grants Exclusive Jurisdiction to Federal Courts

The Objective And Function Of The Complaint: Common Law -- Codes -- Federal Rules, Fleming James, Jr.

Vanderbilt Law Review

Before a court can properly decide a case and enter judgment, certain things must have taken place. The court must have obtained jurisdiction over the parties and over the controversy to be decided.'Limits must be set to the controversy so that the court and the parties may know how to direct their efforts, and so that the court may rule on questions of relevancy. The issues of fact and of law must be framed so that each is allocated to the appropriate tribunal for decision and is presented clearly enough so that the tribunal knows what to decide. The adversary …

Federal Jurisdiction In Personam Of Corporations And Due Process, Thomas F. Green Jr.

Vanderbilt Law Review

A great deal has been written about the personal jurisdiction of state courts and particularly about the applicable due process requirements.' Much less has been contributed by commentators on the subject of due process requirements applying to in personam jurisdiction of a United States district court. Perhaps the reason is the difficulty of finding a rationale in the pertinent decisions. These fail to distinguish between the conditions necessary for valid service of federal court process as contrasted with those essential to the proper service of state process. They also fail to explain why the constitutional provision brings about the result …

Conflict Of Laws -- 1960 Tennessee Survey, Elvin E. Overton

Vanderbilt Law Review

A well known text book on Conflict of Laws concludes its opening section with the sentence, "In brief, a Conflict of Laws problem arises whenever a foreign element gets into a legal question." If this definition is accepted, there were about twenty cases of Conflicts of Laws decided during the survey period, in the sense that foreign elements were shown to exist in the facts which appeared. In another sense, there were other cases in which it must be suspected that substantial "other state" contacts existed, but in which no express mention appears of such facts. On the other hand, …

The Constitution And The Standing Army: Another Problem Of Court-Martial Jurisdiction, Robert D. Duke, Howard S. Vogel

Vanderbilt Law Review

With the emergence of the Soviet menace after World War II, the United States has, for the first time in its history, found it essential to maintain, both here and abroad, a large standing armed force in what is technically peacetime. That has in turn brought to the fore important and novel questions concerning the jurisdiction which courts martial may constitutionally exercise. With millions of Americans serving and likely to serve in the armed forces, it is to be expected that the Supreme Court will scrutinize, with more care than ever before, legislation which purports to strip from these"citizen soldiers" …

Contracts -- 1959 Tennessee Survey, Paul J. Hartman

Vanderbilt Law Review

The distinction between an implied contract (implied in fact) and a quasi contract (implied in law) was presented in a somewhat unusual fashion in the federal case of Holbert v. United States decided by the District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee. Whether or not a federal district court had jurisdiction over plaintiff's case turned on whether the claim was based on implied contract or on quasi contract.

One of the grounds on which the Tucker Act confers jurisdiction on federal district courts to entertain actions against the United States is where the claim is based "upon any express …

Equity -- 1957 Tennessee Survey, Thomas F. Green Jr.

Vanderbilt Law Review

JURISDICTION:

Among what is said' to be the largest number of public laws ever passed by a Tennessee Legislature, the General Assembly passed an act which creates a statutory exception to the doctrine that equity will not enjoin the commission of a crime unless the conduct comes within some recognized head of equity jurisdiction.

EQUITABLE REMEDIES:

Hall v. Briton was a suit in the chancery court to enjoin defendants, who were complainant's former employees, from selling a product produced with the aid of complainant's trade secret.

CONTEMPT:

One of the peculiarities of equity is that its decrees frequently consist of …

Conflict Of Laws -- 1957 Tennessee Survey, John W. Wade

Vanderbilt Law Review

Martin v. Martin' involved a bill in equity by a wife to set aside a divorce decree as fraudulently obtained by the husband. The parties had been domiciled in Pennsylvania. While in Tennessee as a member of the armed forces the husband obtained the divorce in the state. He was subsequently transferred outside the United States. Complainant's bill to set the decree aside for fraud was sustained by the chancellor, defendant being served by publication. Defendant then made a special appearance to contest the jurisdiction of the court and appealed from an adverse ruling.

The Supreme Court held that there …