Supplemental jurisdiction + 3rd party defendat + plaintiff

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
whatchoicetomake
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 4:11 pm

Supplemental jurisdiction + 3rd party defendat + plaintiff

Postby whatchoicetomake » Sun Jan 29, 2012 6:29 pm

Question with supplemental jurisdiction:

A sues B on diversity. B impleads C. C (not diverse from A) then files a claim against P allowed by Rule 14(a)(2)(D) and permitted by supplemental jurisdiction.

From there, will supplemental jurisdiction cover A's counterclaim against C, if it would otherwise be compulsory if diversity existed? I am torn with this question because supplemental jurisdiction (section 1367) says it will not cover persons made parties under Rule 14.

If A cannot file a counterclaim against C, will A be precluded from litigating the claim later?

User avatar
ph14
Posts: 3225
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Supplemental jurisdiction + 3rd party defendat + plaintiff

Postby ph14 » Sun Jan 29, 2012 6:39 pm

whatchoicetomake wrote:Question with supplemental jurisdiction:

A sues B on diversity. B impleads C. C (not diverse from A) then files a claim against P allowed by Rule 14(a)(2)(D) and permitted by supplemental jurisdiction.

From there, will supplemental jurisdiction cover A's counterclaim against C, if it would otherwise be compulsory if diversity existed? I am torn with this question because supplemental jurisdiction (section 1367) says it will not cover persons made parties under Rule 14.

If A cannot file a counterclaim against C, will A be precluded from litigating the claim later?


1) supp jx statute is the worst statute ever
2) ask your professor because there is disagreement
3) no supp jx by the plain language of 1367(b))
4) would not be precluded




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: shaynislegend, Yankees1313 and 7 guests