Top Law Schools

Quick question:

If two parties have complete diversity, can the plaintiff sue in ANY federal court except the one where the D is domiciled?

E.g. A domiciliary of California gets into a car accident in Nevada and wants to sue the car company which is incorporated in New York.
Can the CA plaintiff sue the NY defendant in fed ct. in Nevada? Or must the P sue in CA fed ct?

Thanks so much for your help in advance

What you're asking raises questions of

a) personal jurisdiction, and
b) proper venue, and possibly but very unlikely,
c) choice of law

It doesn't have much to do with subject matter jurisdiction...except for the part where we don't know the amount in controversy.

i know it raises other questions as well.
assuming the damages were over 75,000, i am just asking in relation to subject matter jurisdiction.

Subject matter jurisdiction only looks at whether or not a federal court can hear the case. Determining which federal district is appropriate to sue in is a question of venue.

beta wrote:i know it raises other questions as well.
assuming the damages were over 75,000, i am just asking in relation to subject matter jurisdiction.

Answering strictly on the question of subject matter jurisdiction, you can sue a defendant wherever the hell you want in Federal District Court.

Have to have venue

Either where sustantial amount of cause of action happened, or where d is subject to personal j.

beta wrote:Quick question:

If two parties have complete diversity, can the plaintiff sue in ANY federal court except the one where the D is domiciled?

E.g. A domiciliary of California gets into a car accident in Nevada and wants to sue the car company which is incorporated in New York.
Can the CA plaintiff sue the NY defendant in fed ct. in Nevada? Or must the P sue in CA fed ct?

Thanks so much for your help in advance

This is similar to WWV. Are they suing for a products liability? If they are suing for products liability they could definitely sue in New York for sure because you there's always jurisdiction in state of incorporation. As far as suing in Nevada you would have to walk through the analysis. Do the the Nicastro and WWV analysis to see if there is sufficient contacts and then talk about the stream of commerce and the different approaches O'Connor v. Dissent in Nicastro ect. Then talk about about the fair play and substantial justice. Lots of analysis to do that's where you get your points. Know every approach.

MrsPalsgraf wrote:

beta wrote:Quick question:

If two parties have complete diversity, can the plaintiff sue in ANY federal court except the one where the D is domiciled?

E.g. A domiciliary of California gets into a car accident in Nevada and wants to sue the car company which is incorporated in New York.
Can the CA plaintiff sue the NY defendant in fed ct. in Nevada? Or must the P sue in CA fed ct?

Thanks so much for your help in advance

This is similar to WWV. Are they suing for a products liability? If they are suing for products liability they could definitely sue in New York for sure because you there's always jurisdiction in state of incorporation. As far as suing in Nevada you would have to walk through the analysis. Do the the Nicastro and WWV analysis to see if there is sufficient contacts and then talk about the stream of commerce and the different approaches O'Connor v. Dissent in Nicastro ect. Then talk about about the fair play and substantial justice. Lots of analysis to do that's where you get your points. Know every approach.

Beta, the other facts will matter a lot.

They definitely won't be able to sue in Nevada unless they said before they bought it they'd be moving to Nevada or did something that would alert the buyer they'll be bringing the car to Nevada, but even so the car company wouldn't have known.

The key fact you need to know is where P bought the car. If the company is selling 1000s of cars to NV and P bought it in NV, they can sue to NV.

The trick to all of this will be where the company purposefully availed itself too relating to selling the car.

peeonyou wrote:

MrsPalsgraf wrote:

beta wrote:Quick question:

If two parties have complete diversity, can the plaintiff sue in ANY federal court except the one where the D is domiciled?

E.g. A domiciliary of California gets into a car accident in Nevada and wants to sue the car company which is incorporated in New York.
Can the CA plaintiff sue the NY defendant in fed ct. in Nevada? Or must the P sue in CA fed ct?

Thanks so much for your help in advance

This is similar to WWV. Are they suing for a products liability? If they are suing for products liability they could definitely sue in New York for sure because you there's always jurisdiction in state of incorporation. As far as suing in Nevada you would have to walk through the analysis. Do the the Nicastro and WWV analysis to see if there is sufficient contacts and then talk about the stream of commerce and the different approaches O'Connor v. Dissent in Nicastro ect. Then talk about about the fair play and substantial justice. Lots of analysis to do that's where you get your points. Know every approach.

Beta, the other facts will matter a lot.

They definitely won't be able to sue in Nevada unless they said before they bought it they'd be moving to Nevada or did something that would alert the buyer they'll be bringing the car to Nevada, but even so the car company wouldn't have known.

The key fact you need to know is where P bought the car. If the company is selling 1000s of cars to NV and P bought it in NV, they can sue to NV.

The trick to all of this will be where the company purposefully availed itself too relating to selling the car.

Uh...you guys know that everything you just discussed is Personal Jurisdiction, right?

But beta was asking about Subject Matter jurisdiction, so none of that enters the analysis. Subject matter only looks at Federal vs State Court (or rather, General vs Limited jurisdiction).

OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:
Uh...you guys know that everything you just discussed is Personal Jurisdiction, right?

But beta was asking about Subject Matter jurisdiction, so none of that enters the analysis. Subject matter only looks at Federal vs State Court (or rather, General vs Limited jurisdiction).

Yes, but the question asked--"Which federal court can he sue in?"--doesn't really make any sense as a subject matter jurisdiction question.

beta wrote:Quick question:
If two parties have complete diversity, can the plaintiff sue in ANY federal court except the one where the D is domiciled?

It's been a while since I looked over this material, but...

Yes, except I believe the Plaintiff can even sue in a federal court where the Defendant is domiciled. Defendant's home state won't make a difference, apart from establishing complete diversity, unless it's a removal question.

zworykin wrote:

OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:
Uh...you guys know that everything you just discussed is Personal Jurisdiction, right?

But beta was asking about Subject Matter jurisdiction, so none of that enters the analysis. Subject matter only looks at Federal vs State Court (or rather, General vs Limited jurisdiction).

Yes, but the question asked--"Which federal court can he sue in?"--doesn't really make any sense as a subject matter jurisdiction question.

That was already pointed out to him. He doesn't care. So why do you?

Law students arguing about jurisdiction is awesome. Continue.

reasonable_man wrote:Law students arguing about jurisdiction is awesome. Continue.

I'm not a law student.

GG, owned son.

lukertin wrote:

reasonable_man wrote:Law students arguing about jurisdiction is awesome. Continue.

I'm not a law student.

GG, owned son.

I'm sorry. And Newly minted JD.