Supplemental Jurisdiction

Question 1

Pendant jurisdiction

Answer 1

Federal court has some constitutional hook and state law claim can hang off the federal law claim

Question 2

Federal Courts can decline pendant jurisdiction when

Answer 2

• Won’t be efficient
• Federal law claim is dismissed
• State claim is dominant

Question 3

When determining supplemental jurisdiction look at

Answer 3

If they can be joined together then look at subject matter and supplemental jurisdiction

Question 4

Supplemental jurisdiction requirements

Answer 4

• Is there jurisdiction over something in the case
• Does the second claim arise from a common nucleus of operative facts (same case or controversy)

Question 5

Exceptions when subject matter jurisdiction is based on diversity

Answer 5

Four things must be true for no supplemental jurisdiction
- Claim by an original plaintiff
- Original jurisdiction is based only on diversity jurisdiction
- Person was joined under 14 (impleader), 19 (required parties), 20 (permissive party joinder), 24 (intervention)
- Claims would destroy complete diversity jurisdiction

Question 6

Court can decline supplemental jurisdiction if

Answer 6

• claim raises a novel or complex issue of state law
• claim substantially predominates over the claim that has federal original jurisdiction
• All federal original jurisdiction claims have been dismissed
• Exceptional circumstances with compelling reasons

Question 7

Compulsory counterclaims supplemental jurisdiction is

Answer 7

allowed

• If the party is not allowed to bring it because the court doesn’t have the power to hear that claim, they are not barred from bringing it in the future

Question 8

Permissive counterclaim supplemental jurisdiction is

Answer 8

not allowed because it is a different transaction or occurrence

Question 9

Class action diversity jurisdiction requires

Answer 9

Representative party’s citizenship must be diversity and the amount in controversy is met if $5M at stake