Top Law Schools

I know that if the parties are citizen(s) of different states and the amount in controversy exceed $75K, the district court will have original jurisdiction. But does the case have to be removed? What happen if the case also involves state claims?

ETA: Civ Pro was so long ago.

A plaintiff can bring the case wherever they want (state or federal) if the federal court has subject matter jurisdiction. If they bring it to state court, but the defendant wants to be in federal court, then they can file a motion to remove it to federal court and it will be immediately removed (with a few exceptions noted in the FRCP). I'll let someone else handle the "what if there's state claims" issue because that's opening up a huge can of worms (and by that I mean hypos out the wazoo).

Removal is used where the action was brought in a state court and the D wants to move it to the DC for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending in state court.

The main caveat for diversity cases is that they are only removable if none of the parties in interest properly joined and served as Ds is a citizen of the state in which such action is brought

Look to 28 USC 1367 for supplemental jurisdiction
(a): Authorizes courts to hear all claims that arise out of the same nucleus of operative facts as the proper federal claim (codifies Gibbs) + supplemental jurisd over claims involving addition of parties (overturns Finley)

(b): prohibits supplemental jurisdiction on diversity case (28 USC 1332) when:
- It is over claims brought by Ps against parties brought in under Rule 14 (impleaded party) (even after a claim has been asserted against him) or 20 (joinder of multiple Ds)
- Only applies to original Ps

(c) codifies the Gibb factors for why a DC can decline supplemental jurisdiction: whether state law claim predominates; whether it would require the court to decide novel issues of state law; whether hearing the claims together might confuse the jury

Having horrible flashbacks.

thank you both.