Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Civil Procedure (26)
- Courts (15)
- Litigation (9)
- Constitutional Law (8)
- Legislation (6)
-
- Judges (3)
- Supreme Court of the United States (3)
- Business Organizations Law (2)
- Civil Law (2)
- Jurisprudence (2)
- Legal Profession (2)
- Legal Remedies (2)
- State and Local Government Law (2)
- Common Law (1)
- Criminal Procedure (1)
- Dispute Resolution and Arbitration (1)
- Family, Life Course, and Society (1)
- Housing Law (1)
- International Law (1)
- Place and Environment (1)
- Property Law and Real Estate (1)
- Science and Technology Law (1)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (1)
- Sociology (1)
- Torts (1)
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (17)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (9)
- Cleveland State University (3)
- Pepperdine University (2)
- University of Maine School of Law (2)
-
- Cornell University Law School (1)
- Emory University School of Law (1)
- Pace University (1)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (1)
- The University of Akron (1)
- Touro University Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center (1)
- University of Georgia School of Law (1)
- University of Kentucky (1)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (1)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (1)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (1)
- West Virginia University (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- Michigan Law Review (13)
- Indiana Law Journal (8)
- Cleveland State Law Review (3)
- Faculty Articles (2)
- Maine Law Review (2)
-
- Pepperdine Law Review (2)
- Akron Law Review (1)
- Articles (1)
- Articles by Maurer Faculty (1)
- Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology (1)
- Cornell Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law (1)
- Kentucky Law Journal (1)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (1)
- Other Publications (1)
- Scholarly Works (1)
- Touro Law Review (1)
- University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (1)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (1)
- West Virginia Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 45 of 45
Full-Text Articles in Jurisdiction
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 …
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
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Misreading The Erie Signs: The Downfall Of Diversity, M. T. Hertz
Misreading The Erie Signs: The Downfall Of Diversity, M. T. Hertz
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Swift To Erie/York, Hanna And Beyond: Proposed Solutions For A Major Problem Of Diversity Jurisdiction, E. Blythe Stason Jr.
Swift To Erie/York, Hanna And Beyond: Proposed Solutions For A Major Problem Of Diversity Jurisdiction, E. Blythe Stason Jr.
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
There are four purposes of this article: First, to expose more fully the nature and dimensions of the difficult problem of determining whether a particular rule is "substantive" or "procedural"; Second, to discuss the various judicial attempts to solve it; Third, to show the shortcomings of those attempts, as manifested in both established doctrine and current federal judicial opinions; and, Fourth, to propose some solutions. It should be made clear that we are involved here with a question of allocating power within our federal union. Diversity characterization functions as an unintended device allocating power between state …
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 Jurisdiction In Diversity And Related Cases, W. J. Wagner
Federal Jurisdiction In Diversity And Related Cases, W. J. Wagner
Cleveland State Law Review
An important group of cases over which the inferior federal courts in the United States have jurisdiction consists of those in which the parties are "citizens of different States." Theoretically, it cannot be doubted that controversies "arising under" federal law are proper for adjudication in federal courts, while the necessity of extending the federal judicial power to diversity cases is not readily apparent.
Federal Jurisdiction In Diversity And Related Cases, Wencelas J. Wagner
Federal Jurisdiction In Diversity And Related Cases, Wencelas J. Wagner
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
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 …
Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed
Compulsory Joinder Of Parties In Civil Actions, John W. Reed
Articles
The plaintiff in a civil cause ordinarily is permitted to select the persons with whom he will litigate. The initial designation of parties to an action is made by the plaintiff, and if he chooses to sue B and not A,' that is ordinarily of no concern to B or to A or to the court. So also where the plaintiff without A as co-plaintiff sues B. Not always, however, is the plaintiff permitted unfettered choice in naming the parties to his lawsuit. On the one hand there are persons whose relationship to the situation in litigation is outside the …
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 …
Judicial Self Denial And Judicial Activism - The Personality Of The Original Jurisdiction Of The Federal District Courts, Oliver Morse
Judicial Self Denial And Judicial Activism - The Personality Of The Original Jurisdiction Of The Federal District Courts, Oliver Morse
Cleveland State Law Review
Removal jurisdiction is the authority by which a cause of action or claim can be transferred, before trial, from a state court to a federal district court. This jurisdiction is purely statutory and as such finds its authority and the manner and conditions upon which that authority is to be exercised, in the acts of Congress. In the grant of that authority, Congress is confined to the limits of the constitution. Congressional authority for removal jurisdiction is not found in any of the express grants of jurisdiction in the constitution. Congress' power to provide for removal jurisdiction is an implied …
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 …