Top Law Schools

edit

Section 1332 is what you are looking for I believe. But if you are looking for me to put it in my own words, well then here it goes. Reason for the first part of what you said the USA citizen and a foreign citizen get fed court is because of compete diversity (obvious statement), anyway part of this reason is potentially if they were forced to be tried in the state court there is more potential for favoritism/bias towards the home stater... You think a dude from France is going to get a fair shake down in Texas state court against a Texas resident? Prolly not, well if you have two foreign nationals, that same potential for bias doesn't exist. So, the importance of Fed Court for a fair shake just isn't there.
- Note what I said is something that isn't in Section 1332, but a potential consideration. If you want the black letter law 1332 is what you are looking for, another reason is why should the Federal Court have any interest in the case?? If it is not arising out of a Federal Law or Constitutional question, then they have no interest... They would be flooded with bullshit stuff that they don't have time for.

For diversity jurisdiction purposes, it's easy to think of "the rest of the world" as a 52nd state (with D.C. being the 51st). There are a few exceptions to this, but unless you're looking at a select few exceptions, I think one of which is a class action suit, it's a pretty reliable method.

But WhatToDo is essentially right in that the biggest policy consideration of diversity, which has been around for about as long as the Federal Courts, is to discourage "home cooking" for the in state party by choosing a favorable forum.

When we have two defendants, one domestic and one foreign, once we find out where the domestic defendant will be hailed into court, we bring the foreign defendant to that court too. Is there blackletter law for this? We learned about it in class, but I only gathered that it is customary to bring the alien defendant into the same court as the domestic defendant, where's the black letter law?

Fiction wrote:If a citizen of the USA and a citizen of a foreign country become embroiled in a civil suit on US soil, they have the option of taking the dispute to federal court. However, if two foreign nationals come into civil conflict, their case may only be tried in state court.

Why is this?

Foreign nationals bring suit against one another all the time in federal court.

Anonymous Loser wrote:

Fiction wrote:If a citizen of the USA and a citizen of a foreign country become embroiled in a civil suit on US soil, they have the option of taking the dispute to federal court. However, if two foreign nationals come into civil conflict, their case may only be tried in state court.

Why is this?

Foreign nationals bring suit against one another all the time in federal court.

For federal causes of action, sure, but it seems evident from OP's question that he is looking at grounds of diversity jurisdiction. On state law causes of action, foreign nationals can generally not sue one another in federal court.

OP, keep in mind that if the cause of action arises under federal law, you can generally sue in federal court. There are a few exceptions, such as Shoshone Mining Co. v. Rutter where the relative importance of the state claim, federal claim, and local custom are weighed, but they are very narrow.

Anonymous Loser wrote:

Fiction wrote:If a citizen of the USA and a citizen of a foreign country become embroiled in a civil suit on US soil, they have the option of taking the dispute to federal court. However, if two foreign nationals come into civil conflict, their case may only be tried in state court.

Why is this?

Foreign nationals bring suit against one another all the time in federal court.

Not under diversity jurisdiction, they don't .

Under FRCP Section 1350:

The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil
action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of
nations or a treaty of the United States.

It also seems that from reading 1331 that the statute's structure makes it clear that the federal courts are only interested in adjudicating disputes involving citizens, permanent resident aliens, and US corporations. I don't have any case law to back this up but the statute seems to suggest that Congress never intended for the federal courts to be used when no US citizen, corporation, or permanent resident alien is involved. You may look to the congressional record for the passage of 1331 to see what the intent on the Congress was in passing the statute.

In contrast, the State courts are courts of general jurisdiction and so long as the court finds sufficient personal jurisdiction then the parties are entitled to protection of the laws of that State.

and if its a US citizen and an alien suing an alien, is there not jurisdiction because there are aliens on both sides?

trey wrote:and if its a US citizen and an alien suing an alien, is there not jurisdiction because there are aliens on both sides?

I think in this case it would depend on the status of the alien who is joined with US citizen. If they were a permanent resident then I think you could assert diversity jurisdiction. I'm not really sure though.

firebreathingliberal wrote:

trey wrote:and if its a US citizen and an alien suing an alien, is there not jurisdiction because there are aliens on both sides?

I think in this case it would depend on the status of the alien who is joined with US citizen. If they were a permanent resident then I think you could assert diversity jurisdiction. I'm not really sure though.

If an alien is a permanent resident, that alien is a citizen of the state they reside in for diversity jx purposes (at least, that's what my Casebook says).

another "fun" twist in this are so-called "stateless" citizens do not qualify for fed jx versus an american citizen(unless there is a federal Q) [fox v. taylor]

keg411 wrote:

firebreathingliberal wrote:

trey wrote:and if its a US citizen and an alien suing an alien, is there not jurisdiction because there are aliens on both sides?

I think in this case it would depend on the status of the alien who is joined with US citizen. If they were a permanent resident then I think you could assert diversity jurisdiction. I'm not really sure though.

If an alien is a permanent resident, that alien is a citizen of the state they reside in for diversity jx purposes (at least, that's what my Casebook says).

Truth. It's right in 1332

you can't have a US citizen and a foreign state v. foreign state. Correct?