Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

Selected Works

Douglas D. McFarland

Selected Works

Courts

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Viewing The "Same Case Or Controversy" Of Supplemental Jurisdiction Through The Lens Of The "Common Nucleus Of Operative Fact" Of Pendent Jurisdiction, Douglas D. Mcfarland Jul 2012

Viewing The "Same Case Or Controversy" Of Supplemental Jurisdiction Through The Lens Of The "Common Nucleus Of Operative Fact" Of Pendent Jurisdiction, Douglas D. Mcfarland

Douglas D. McFarland

When a federal court has jurisdiction of a claim, supplemental jurisdiction of § 1367(a) allows the court to adjudicate all parts “of the same case or controversy under Article III.” This article argues that the best way to interpret that phrase is by examining the meaning of “common nucleus of operative fact,” the test for its ancestor pendent jurisdiction. Through that lens, “same case or controversy” means the broad grouping of facts, without regard to legal theories or categories, that a lay person would expect to be tried together. And in limning the boundaries of that grouping of facts, the …


Seeing The Forest For The Trees: The Transaction Or Occurrence And The Claim Interlock Civil Procedure, Douglas D. Mcfarland Aug 2010

Seeing The Forest For The Trees: The Transaction Or Occurrence And The Claim Interlock Civil Procedure, Douglas D. Mcfarland

Douglas D. McFarland

The article traces the transaction or occurrence and the claim through various joinder (cross-claims, permissive joinder of parties, rule 14 claims), pleading (claims, separate counts, relation back of amendments), and interlocutory appeal (54(b))rules to the following conclusion. Since courts have struggled with the proper fact-based definition of claim and transaction or occurrence when they interpret individual rules in individual cases, we should not be surprised that courts and commentators have been reluctant to recognize the commonality of these concepts throughout the rules. “Claim” has been interpreted differently in different contexts. “Transaction or occurrence” has been interpreted differently in different contexts. …