trying to make sense of my outlines
1) In Statutory Interpleader, Personal Jurisdiction is proper anywhere in U.S.
2) Venue is proper in district any claimant resides
Consider this ex:
Stakeholder State A
potential claimants states B, C & D
Stakeholder files in Fed State A
________________________________________
How can jurisdiction be proper but venue improper? what rule am I missing? (is the stakeholder considered claimant for venue purposes?)
statutory interpleader jurisdiction Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are sharing sensitive information about bar exam prep. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned."
-
myrtlewinston
- Posts: 462
- Joined: Sun May 24, 2015 8:39 pm
Re: statutory interpleader jurisdiction
Can you post the excerpt verbatim?
-
seasidemama
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2016 4:48 am
Re: statutory interpleader jurisdiction
figuring out a question from adaptibar - don't have the exact text. q was asking for proper jurisdiction but I got it wrong because I was confused as to venue. Now I see elsewhere that so long as jurisdiction is proper venue may be where any claimant resides - this is for statutory interpleader.myrtlewinston wrote:Can you post the excerpt verbatim?
I was confused since generally, venue is proper where any D resides (where all Ds same state) or where substantial part of claim arose or property located.
