Supplemental Jurisdiction:
- allowing in other causes of action w/ an action that has original juris in fed ct (diversity/fed. Q)
is efficient
- otherwise there would have to be separate actions in state and fed. court about same T/O
- argument for supp. juris. = all actions are part of same case/controversy under Art. III so they
can all go in front of fed. court
- so Congress can permit this under the Constit., but have they allowed it?
- Yes, but w/ exceptions: 28 USC 1367
- 1367(b) lists important exceptions (only relevant when core action is diversity & candidate
actions for supp jur are brought by P)
- To answer whether supp. Juris. Look to statute (purpose to statute is to determine whether
P is trying to “frustrate the purposes of diversity”) (Green says badly written statute)
- Congress only wanted to abrogate Finley & Aldinger in 1367 (only wanted to change those
cases, not other prior law)
Steps To Determining Supp. Juris:
1. Is action w/o original jur part of same case/controversy as action that does have orig jur?
- if YES and action with original jur is fed question, then there is supp jur
2. if cause of action with original jur is diversity then must worry about exceptions in 1367(b)
In any civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction
founded solely on section 1332 of this title, the district courts shall not have
supplemental jurisdiction under subsection (a) over claims by plaintiffs against
persons made parties under Rule 14, 19, 20, or 24 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, or over claims by persons proposed to be joined as plaintiffs under Rule 19
of such rules, or seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24 of such rules, when
exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the
jurisdictional requirements of section 1332.
3. remember that you do not have to rely on supp jur if the cause of action has its own source of
SMJ
- if no supp juris for extra cause of action, then it must be dismissed & court must do sua sponte
if parties don't bring it up
**just because a cause of action is allowed under the joinder rules doesn't mean it’s okay for
supp juris!
Docsity.com
