permissive counterclaim

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )

Posts: 65
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 6:07 pm

permissive counterclaim

Postby RR320 » Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:46 pm

let's say P brings claim for $50,000 and then defendant brings permissive counterclaim for $80,000 can this suit be heard? Or no because the plaintiff has to meet the 75K as well?

User avatar

Posts: 940
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 12:43 pm

Re: permissive counterclaim

Postby Mce252 » Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:49 pm

Plaintiff's claim has to meet amount in controversy requirement.


Posts: 218
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:40 pm

Re: permissive counterclaim

Postby portaprokoss » Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:36 pm

I'm remembering something about aggregation of claims in some specific, circumstance...but I cannot recall exactly. I also recall something about P viewpoint aggregation and d viewpoint aggregation. There may be more to your question than meets the eye.


Posts: 129
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: permissive counterclaim

Postby rklafehn » Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:47 pm

While it may appear odd that a federal court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over the hypothetical claim presented in the OP (because if the D would have brought suit initially the claim would meet the amount-in-controversy requirement), the amount-in-controversy requirement of 28 USC 1332 is determined solely by the original P. Similar to the Motley Rule (well-pleaded complaint), this rule helps prevent gaming the system and getting cases into federal court simply by pleading manipulation.

If his claim is for more than $75K, then the amount-in-controversy requirement is met. He is allowed to aggregate claims against a single D or multiple Ds if their interest is common and undivided.

You cannot aggregate claims against multiple Ds if there interest is not common and undivided to meet the amount-in-controversy requirement.

The only odd aggregation quirk is the Exxon Rule where, because of the way 28 USC 1367(b) was drafted, as long as one P meets the amount-in-controversy requirement, a second P can piggy-back on the original P to file a claim against the same D even if the amount-in-controversy is not met with his individual claim.
Last edited by rklafehn on Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar

Posts: 3464
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: permissive counterclaim

Postby cinephile » Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:47 pm

When you have two Plaintiffs properly joined against one Defendant, as long as one of the Plaintiffs has met the amount in controversy, it's alright to aggregate the claims. This might be a supplemental jurisdiction thing where the these claims have to arise from the common nucleus of operative fact.

It'd also be okay to aggregate claims against two defendants for the same claim if you're holding them joint and severally liable -- that way you could collect the whole $75,000.01 from either one, as long as either are liable for the amount in controversy, it's okay.

Return to “Forum for Law School Students�

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Graybrow, Indy16 and 22 guests