Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Ripple Effects: The Unintended Change To Jurisdictional Pleading Standards After Iqbal, James E. Von Der Heydt
Ripple Effects: The Unintended Change To Jurisdictional Pleading Standards After Iqbal, James E. Von Der Heydt
Cleveland State Law Review
This Note describes a little-observed ripple effect of the new pleading standard announced in Iqbal, the antiterrorism case whose holding swept broadly and changed the ground rules for considering allegations in so-called 12(b)(6) motions for all civil cases. This Note examines the interplay between the Twombly/Iqbal doctrine and federal courts’ practical approach to subject-matter jurisdiction. Part II describes the background jurisprudence on subject-matter jurisdiction, including the sharp line the Supreme Court has consistently re-drawn between claims lacking merit and those lacking jurisdictional basis, from Bell v. Hood through Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp. The consistent theme of this jurisprudence …
Creating Diversity Jurisdiction In Removal Actions Through The Improper Use Of Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 21: Procedural Blackjack Or Judicial Bust, Anthony Andricks
Creating Diversity Jurisdiction In Removal Actions Through The Improper Use Of Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 21: Procedural Blackjack Or Judicial Bust, Anthony Andricks
Cleveland State Law Review
Recently, federal district courts have held that Federal Civil Rule of Procedure 21 bestows upon them the power to sever nondiverse parties or claims to create diversity jurisdiction without first finding that a party or claim is improperly joined. Severance may mean that a plaintiff who brings a state court action against multiple parties, one or more of which is not diverse, runs the risk of a federal court severing the action in a removal analysis, even where the plaintiff has committed no improper joinder of parties. Severance may leave a plaintiff with the need to conduct simultaneous suits--one in …