1. Tues., Sept. 17

2. federal subject matter jurisdiction

3. federal subject matter jurisdiction diversity and alienage jurisdiction

4. U. S. Const. Article III. Section. 2
U.S. Const. Article III.  Section. 2.  Clause 1:The judicial Power shall extend …to Controversies …between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States…and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects. 

5. Sec Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs (a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between -

6. (1) citizens of different States; (2) citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except that the district courts shall not have original jurisdiction under this subsection of an action between citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state who are lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States and are domiciled in the same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and (4) a foreign state ... as plaintiff and citizens of a State or of different States.

7. P (a citizen of New York) sues D (a citizen of California) for divorce in federal court. Diversity case?

8. What is domicile?

9. I'm domiciled in New York
I'm domiciled in New York. I then establish the intent to move to Arizona permanently, but on the way I get in accident in Oklahoma, where I remain for rehabilitation. Where is my domicile?

10. Baker v. Keck (E.D. Ill. 1936)

11. Restatement of the Conflict of Laws § 15 To acquire a domicil of choice, a person must establish a dwelling-place with the intention of making it his home.   The fact of physical presence at a dwelling-place and the intention to make it a home must concur; if they do so, even for a moment, the change of domicil takes place.

12. Story: “It will be observed that, if there is an intention to remain, even though it be for an indefinite time, but still with the intention of making the location a place of present domicile, this latter intention will control, even though the person entertains a floating intention to return at some indefinite future period.”

13. corporate citizenship

14. 28 U.S.C. §1332(c)  For the purposes of this section and section 1441 of this title— (1) a corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen of every State and foreign state by which it has been incorporated and of the State or foreign state where it has its principal place of business…

15. - P, a citizen of California, sues the D Corp
- P, a citizen of California, sues the D Corp. in federal court in the Northern District of California (N.D. Cal.) under state law for more than $75k. - The suit concerns a faulty lighter that P bought from a store in the N.D. Cal. and blew up in P’s home in the N.D. Cal.  - The D Corp. makes the lighters and is incorporated in New Jersey. - The D. Corp. has three of its four manufacturing plants and 2/3 of its employees in Texas. Its other plant and around 1/4 of its employees are in Louisiana.  - Its financial and administrative headquarters is in Los Angeles, in the Central District of California, where the President, Board of Directors and 1/12 of its employees are located. - Is this a diversity case?

16. Hertz Corp. v. Friend (US 2010)

17. The P Corp., incorporated in Delaware with its US PPB in California but its total world-wide PPB in Germany, sues D a Frenchman. Alienage case?

18. devices to create diversity/alienage

19. Kramer v Caribbean Mills (US 1969)

20. 28 USC §1359 A district court shall not have jurisdiction of a civil action in which any party, by assignment or otherwise, has been improperly or collusively made or joined to invoke the jurisdiction of such court.

21. X (Cal. ) slips and falls in a store owned by D (Cal. )
X (Cal.) slips and falls in a store owned by D (Cal.). Can X generate diversity jurisdiction by assigning his lawsuit to P (Nev.)?

22. Imagine that the contract right had been assigned to Kramer for $10,000, reserving no interest in the contract claim

23. devices to defeat diversity/alienage

24. P (Texas) sells its contract right against D (New York) to Kramer (New York) for $1, with Kramer promising to pay back 95% of any recovery as a bonus Kramer sues D in state court in Texas May D remove to federal court?

25. P (Texas) assigns 1/10 of its contract right against D (New York) (worth $8,000 if the action prevails) to Kramer (New York) for $1,000 P and Kramer sue D in state court in Texas May D remove to federal court?

26. Rose v. Giamatti (S.D. Ohio 1989)

27. In fraudulent joinder cases the underlying reason for removal is that there is no factual basis upon which it can be claimed that the resident [!] defendant is jointly liable or where there is such liability there is no purpose to prosecute the action against the resident defendant in good faith….

28. - P (NJ) wishes to sue the D Corp. for fraud - D Corp
- P (NJ) wishes to sue the D Corp. for fraud - D Corp. has is incorporated in NY with PPB in NY - P does not want the action removed by the D Corp. to federal court - So P joins X (NJ), an accountant who was in part responsible for the D Corp.’s misrepresentations, as a defendant - Can the D Corp. successfully remove?

29. removal

30. 1441(a) Except as otherwise expressly provided by Act of Congress, any civil action brought in a State court of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant or the defendants, to the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending.

32. - A (Cal.) sues B (Cal.) under 42 USC § 1983 for illegal search and seizure - Suit is brought in California state court in San Francisco - May B successfully remove to N.D. Cal.?

33. - A (Cal. ) sues Officer B (Cal
- A (Cal.) sues Officer B (Cal.) in California state court in San Francisco in connection with an arrest. - A has two causes of action against B: violation of federal civil rights and state law battery. - May B remove to the N.D. Cal.?

34. A (Cal.) sues B (NY) and C (Cal) for battery in state court in Nevada Can B and C remove Can only B remove?

35. A (Cal.) sues B (NY) and C (NJ) for battery A suing for B for more than 75K but C for only 20K May the case be successfully removed by B and C?

36. A (Nev. ) sues B (Cal. ) and C (Oreg
A (Nev.) sues B (Cal.) and C (Oreg.) in California state court for battery A asks for $80k each from B and C May B and C remove?

37. 1441(b)(2) A civil action otherwise removable solely on the basis of the jurisdiction under section 1332(a) of this title may not be removed if any of the parties in interest properly joined and served as defendants is a citizen of the State in which such action is brought.