Jurisdiction Commons^™

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 …

Chevron, Cooperative Federalism, And Telecommunications Reform, Philip J. Weiser

Publications

No abstract provided.

Recent Developments, An Appeal By Any Other Name: Congress's Empty Victory Over Habeas Rights--Felker V. Turpin, 116 S. Ct. 2333 (1996), Scott Moss

Publications

No abstract provided.

Simplifying The Choice Of Forum: A Reply, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

We have three things to think about here, as the real estate agents say—“location, location, location.” Accordingly, the two of us have engaged for several years in empirical studies aimed at gauging the effect of forum on case outcome. The results to date strongly suggest that forum really matters. An early piece of the puzzle fell into place in our study of venue. In that article, we examined the benefits and costs of the federal courts scheme of transfer of civil venue “in the interest of justice.” Ours was a pretty straightforward and simple cost-benefit analysis, but we supported it …

Xenophilia In American Courts, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Foreigner! The word says it all. Verging on the politically incorrect, the expression is full of connotation and implication. A foreigner will face bias. By such a thought process, many people believe that litigants have much to fear in courts foreign to them. In particular, non-Americans fare badly in American courts. Foreigners believe this. Even Americans believe this.

Such views about American courts are understandable. After all, the grant of alienage jurisdiction to the federal courts, both original and removal, constitutes an official assumption that xenophobic bias is present in state courts. As James Madison said of state courts: “We …

Exorcising The Evil Of Forum-Shopping, Kevin M. Clermont, Theodore Eisenberg

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Most of the business of litigation comprises pretrial disputes. A common and important dispute is over where adjudication should take place. Civil litigators deal with nearly as many change-of-venue motions as trials. The battle over venue often constitutes the critical issue in a case.

The American way is to provide plaintiffs with a wide choice of venues for suit. But the American way has its drawbacks. To counter these drawbacks, an integral part of our court systems, and in particular the federal court system, is the scheme of transfer of venue "in the interest of justice." However, the leading evaluative …

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

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.

Removal And The Eleventh Amendment: The Case For District Court Remand Discretion To Avoid A Bifurcated Suit, Mitchell N. Berman

Michigan Law Review

This Note concludes that the Sixth Circuit was half right: when a civil action names both state and private defendants - what this Note terms a "mixed case" - and when the claims against private defendants arise under federal law, the district court must grant removal of the case8 and must remand the claims against the state defendant. However, this Note also observes that the Fifth Circuit probably achieved the better result. After defendants have removed a mixed case to federal court and the district court has remanded the barred claims, the dual court systems and the parties will usually …

Pathfinder: Tribal, Federal, And State Court Subject Matter Jurisdictional Bounds: Suits Involving Native American Interests, John W. Gillingham

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Federal Courts In The Political Order: Judicial Jurisdiction And American Political Theory, James Hopenfeld

Michigan Law Review

A Review of The Federal Courts in the Political Order: Judicial Jurisdiction and American Political Theory by Martin H. Redish

Treatise Writing And Federal Jurisdiction Scholarship: Does Doctrine Matter When Law Is Politics?, Richard A. Matasar

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Federal Jurisdiction by Erwin Chemerinsky and Federal Jurisdiction 1990 Supplement by Erwin Chemerinsky

Isolationism Or Deference? The Alien Tort Claims Act And The Separation Of Powers, Victor A. Pappalardo

Michigan Journal of International Law

This Note examines the rationales behind Filartiga and other cases which have had the opportunity to pass upon its holding, notably the holdings in Tel-Oren v. Libyan Arab Republic and Forti v. Suarez- Mason. It then focuses on the validity of these rationales with respect to the constitutional separation of powers scheme. In so doing, it analyzes Filartiga's conclusions in light of the act of state and political question doctrines, two closely interrelated doctrines which have been at the forefront of the separation of powers criticisms of Filartiga. This Note concludes by suggesting that a clear case exists …

3rd Annual Federal Practice Institute, Office Of Continuing Legal Education At The University Of Kentucky College Of Law, John R. Leathers, Willam M. Lear, Edward H. Johnstone, Eugene E. Siler, Frank E. Haddad, Laramie L. Leatherman, Melissa Forsythe, Gregory L. Monge, Leonard Green, Thomas D. Lambros, Stanley M. Chesley, Charles S. Cassis

Continuing Legal Education Materials

Outline of speakers' presentations from the 3rd Annual Federal Practice Institute held by UK/CLE on September 23, 1988.

Procedural And Substantive Problems In Complex Litigation Arising From Disasters, Jack B. Weinstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

American Indians And The Bicentennial, Richard B. Collins

Publications

No abstract provided.

The State Of New York's State Federal-Judicial Council, Hon. George C. Pratt

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Foreword: Certification: Assuring The Primacy Of State Law In The Fourth Circuit, John D. Butzner, Jr., Mary Nash Kelly

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Agenda: The Federal Impact On State Water Rights, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center

The Federal Impact on State Water Rights (Summer Conference, June 11-13)

Conference organizers and/or speakers included University of Colorado School of Law professors James N. Corbridge, Jr., David H. Getches, Lawrence J. MacDonnell and Richard B. Collins.

In general, water rights are a matter of state law. However, the availability and development of water are affected by important federal rights, policies and programs. In this conference, an outstanding group of private practitioners, government representatives and academics consider this important topic.

Controlling The Structural Injunction, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

The War On Diversity, John W. Reed

Other Publications

Over the past decade or more there have been strong pressures to abolish the diversity jurisdiction of the federal courts. With the strong backing of the prestigious American Law Institute and many scholars, and with the support of the Chief Justice, Senator Kennedy, and others, specific proposals have been introduced in Congress, have been discussed at enormous length, and have passed one or the other House but not both. At the moment, therefore, we still have diversity jurisdiction, and it is safe to predict that abolition of diversity will not occur during the present session of Congress. Nevertheless, the long-term …

Federal Jurisdiction: The Perils And Rewards Of Pulling Things Together, Gene R. Shreve

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Federal Jurisdiction: Tensions in the Allocation of Judicial Power by Martin H. Redish

Book Review. Federal Jurisdiction: The Perils And Rewards Of Pulling Things Together, Gene R. Shreve

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Separation Of Powers And The Scope Of Federal Equitable Remedies, Robert F. Nagel

Publications

No abstract provided.

Criminal Jurisdiction: Double Jeopardy In Indian Country, Larry Alan Burns

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Jurisdictional Conflicts Over Counterclaims Against The United States, David G. Swenson

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This article first discusses the different approaches that courts have used in determining district court jurisdiction over counterclaims and the differing limits that are imposed upon the size of the counterclaim. Second, it examines the relationship between the Court of Claims and the district courts in cases where the defendant cannot counterclaim for full relief in a district court. The article concludes with several legislative proposals that could lessen the uncertainty and lack of uniformity among the courts currently facing a defendant who wants to counterclaim against the government.

Admiralty Procedure And Jurisdiction After The 1966 Unification, David W. Robertson

Michigan Law Review

From the nation's beginning, the federal district courts have been vested with jurisdiction in cases "of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction." Like its predecessor statute, section 1333 of the present Judicial Code asserts that the jurisdiction is "exclusive of the courts of the states," but the infamous "saving clause" goes on to negate that exclusivity in the bulk of maritime cases by giving the plaintiff the option of maintaining his action in any other court having jurisdiction over it. In "saving clause" cases--that is, cases that could have been brought in federal court under the admiralty jurisdiction, but which were maintained, …

Federal Court Doctrines In Avoidance Of Adjudication: Exhaustion, Abstention And The Anti-Injunction Statute, Gene R. Shreve

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The Consumer Class Action, Arthur H. Travers Jr., Jonathan M. Landers

Publications

No abstract provided.

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 …