Wednesday, August 16, 2006

Outline - Civil Procedure - VIII - Supplemental Jurisdiction - 28 U.S.C. § 1367

Civil Procedure (2005-2006)

VIII. SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION – 28 U.S.C. § 1367

A. Required Elements

1. “Trunk or “original” or “federal” claim over which the federal court has original SMJ (federal question, diversity, or “other”), and

2. “Branch” or “supplemental” or “nonfederal” claim is part of same case or controversy as trunk claim

a. “common nucleus of operative facts”

b. logical relationship between claims (broader than “same transaction or occurrence”)

B. Diversity Trunk Exception – If the trunk is solely based on diversity, and the following would destroy diversity:

1. Original plaintiff may not bring supplemental claims against persons made parties under Rule 14 (impleader), Rule 19 (compulsory joinder), Rule 20 (permissive joinder), or Rule 24 (intervention); and

2. New plaintiffs proposed to be added under Rule 19 (compulsory joinder) or seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24 may not bring supplemental claims.

3. Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Kroger – Where case as amended impleaded defendant whose citizenship destroyed diversity, case must be dismissed.

4. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc.

a. Plaintiffs joined under Rule 20 do not contaminate case

b. Non-diverse plaintiff class members under Rule 23 do not contaminate case

C. Discretion to Decline Supplemental Jurisdiction

1. Novel or complex state law

2. Supplemental claim predominates

3. Original trunk claims dismissed

4. Other compelling reasons in exceptional circumstances

D. Statute of Limitations Tolling Provision – Tolls SoL for supplemental and related claims for 30 days after dismissal to give claimant opportunity to re-file in state court

E. Flow Chart

1. If independent SMJ exists for each claim, no need to analyze under 1367

2. If no independent SMJ exists for each claim, analyze under 1367 only if trunk satisfies independent SMJ

3. Analyze branch claims under 1367(b)

a. If defendant was joined under Rule 14, 19, 20, or 24, no supplemental jurisdiction

b. If plaintiff joined, analyze under Exxon (Rule 20, 23 plaintiffs okay as long as one member meets diversity)

c. Under 1367(c), court may exercise discretion

[] [] [] []

1 comment:

TLanice said...

OMG this just saved my life. I read that statute over and over and could not get past (b). THANK YOU