Supplemental jurisdiction + 3rd party defendat + plaintiff Forum

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

New
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 4:11 pm

Supplemental jurisdiction + 3rd party defendat + plaintiff

Post by 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

Gold
Posts: 3227
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Supplemental jurisdiction + 3rd party defendat + plaintiff

Post by 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

Post Reply

Return to “Forum for Law School Students”