Mon., Sept. 16

federal subject matter jurisdiction

federal question (or “arising under”) jurisdiction

U. S. Const. Article III. Section. 2 U.S. Const. Article III.  Section. 2.  The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority…

28 U.S.C. §  1331. - Federal question The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.   

I am a beneficiary of a trust and sue the trustee for breach of fiduciary duty (a state law cause of action) because he has invested in illegal securities in violation of the trust the securities are illegal because they are in violation of federal law federal question?

declaratory judgment actions?

- D lies to P in connection with the purchase of a financial instrument - P sues D in federal court under the federal Securities Exchange Act (SEA), claiming the instrument is a “security” and so also covered by the Act - federal question is the source of SMJ - P also brings a state law fraud action in under supplemental jurisdiction - court concludes that the instrument is not a “security” within the meaning of the Act - it therefore dismisses the SEA action - failure to state a claim (in which case state law action may remain) or lack of SMJ?

- You hit me in the face and I bring an action against you in federal court (using federal question jurisdiction as my source of subject matter jurisdiction) for a violation of the Securities Exchange Act. - I join a state law battery action under supplemental jurisdiction

federal subject matter jurisdiction diversity and alienage jurisdiction

U. S. Const. Article III. Section. 2 U.S. Const. Article III.  Section. 2.  Clause 1:The judicial Power shall extend …to Controversies …between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States…and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects. 

Citizen of a State = US national who is domiciled in a US state (or US territory or DC)

Constitutional scope of diversity minimal diversity = Is any P a citizen of a different state than any D?

Californian v. Californian and New Yorker Californian v. Californian and New Yorker? - minimal diversity Californian v. Californian? - no minimal diversity

1332(d)(2) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action in which the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is a class action in which—(A) any member of a class of plaintiffs is a citizen of a State different from any defendant; (B) any member of a class of plaintiffs is a foreign state or a citizen or subject of a foreign state and any defendant is a citizen of a State; or (C) any member of a class of plaintiffs is a citizen of a State and any defendant is a foreign state or a citizen or subject of a foreign state.

Sec. 1332. - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs (a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between -

(1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

Strawbridge rule controversy between “citizens of different states” in 28 USC § 1332(a)(1) and (a)(3) means complete diversity

complete diversity = Is any P a citizen of the same state as any D complete diversity = Is any P a citizen of the same state as any D? If so, no complete diversity

Californian v. Californian and New Yorker Californian v. Californian and New Yorker? - no complete diversity Californian and New Yorker v. Nevadan and Floridian? - complete diversity

Constitutional scope of alienage (“between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects”)

Foreign Citizens or Subjects = foreign nationals (even if domiciled in US)

Art. III – need minimal alienage Is anyone on one side of the “v Art. III – need minimal alienage Is anyone on one side of the “v.” a citizen of a state and anyone on the other side of the “v.” a foreign citizen or subject? Is so then minimal alienage.

German v. New Yorker and German - minimal alienage German v German v. New Yorker and German - minimal alienage German v. Italian - no minimal alienage

(1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

1332(a)(2) – controversy between “citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state” means complete alienage

complete alienage – are all the aliens on one side of the “v complete alienage – are all the aliens on one side of the “v.” – and on the other side are there citizens of states? If so then complete alienage.

German v. Californian and New Yorker - complete alienage [NOTE: Prof German v. Californian and New Yorker - complete alienage [NOTE: Prof. Green changed this example after class – it was originally a German and a New Yorker v. a Californian, but that is also a diversity case under 1332(a)(3)] German and New Yorker v. Californian and Italian - no complete alienage

Examples: is there federal SMJ under 28 USC 1332(a) Examples: is there federal SMJ under 28 USC 1332(a)? assumptions: - jurisdictional minimum is met - action is brought in federal court by the plaintiff

New Yorker sues Californian, who impleads his insurer, a New Yorker NY CA NY

Californian sues a German (1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

German sues a Frenchman (1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

New Yorker sues Californian and Frenchman (1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

A New Yorker and a German sue a Californian and a German (1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

Californian sues a French citizen admitted for permanent residency in the United States who is domiciled in California (1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

German sues French citizen admitted for permanent residency in the United States who is domiciled in California (1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

Californian sues Elizabeth Taylor, an American national domiciled in France (1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

- Dred Scott, a slave owned in Missouri, is taken by his master to Wisconsin Territory (a free territory) - Scott lives there for a while and then returns with his master to Missouri. - Sanford, a New York citizen becomes Scott’s master - Scott sues Sanford in federal court to establish that his time in a free territory had made him free under state law - diversity jurisdiction?

A German sues a Frenchman and a New Yorker (1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

A citizen of DC sues a Virginian under Virginia state law

1332(e) The word ''States'', as used in this section, includes the Territories, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico

U. S. Const. Article III. Section. 2 U.S. Const. Article III.  Section. 2.  Clause 1:The judicial Power shall extend …to Controversies …between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States…and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects. 

What is domicile?

Baker v. Keck (E.D. Ill. 1936)

Rest confl 15 To acquire a domicil of choice, a person must establish a dwelling-place with the intention of making it his home.   The fact of physical presence at a dwelling-place and the intention to make it a home must concur; if they do so, even for a moment, the change of domicil takes place.‘

I'm domiciled in New York I'm domiciled in New York. I then establish the intent to move to Arizona permanently, but on the way I get in accident in Oklahoma, where I remain for rehabilitation. Where is my domicile?

P sells his home in Illinois and moves to OK with the hope of finding work. He lives in a hotel until he can find work and an apartment. Domiciles in OK?

Prisoners? Students?