Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

Aggregation of Jurisdictional Amount

Read a random definition: negative misprision

A quick definition of Aggregation of Jurisdictional Amount:

Aggregation of Jurisdictional Amount: When someone wants to sue another person or company, they need to make sure the amount of money they are asking for is enough to meet the court's requirement. This requirement is currently $75,000. If someone has multiple claims against the same person, they can add up the money they are asking for to meet the requirement. But if they have different reasons for each claim, they can't add them together. If two or more people have the same problem with the same person or company, they can add up their claims to meet the requirement.

A more thorough explanation:

Aggregation of jurisdictional amount refers to the practice of combining multiple claims to meet the minimum amount required to file a lawsuit in a particular court. The current amount in controversy requirement is $75,000.

For example, if a person has two claims against the same party, they can combine the amount of both claims to meet the jurisdictional amount. However, if a person has alternative theories of recovery for the same claim, they cannot use them to increase the amount in controversy. For instance, if a person's car was damaged in an accident, they cannot claim both failure to stop at a stop sign and texting while driving to increase the amount of compensation they can receive. The maximum amount they can receive is the value of their car.

Aggregation between the claims of two or more separate people is allowed when the controversy concerns a common and undivided interest. For example, if two people jointly own a property and have a dispute over it, they can combine their claims to meet the jurisdictional amount.

These examples illustrate how aggregation of jurisdictional amount works and the exceptions that apply to it. It is important to note that this practice is generally not permitted, and parties should consult with a lawyer to determine the best course of action.

aggravating factor | AGI

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:06
it means you will not be rejected today and may be accepted or WL in the future
Just got my Michigan rejection
BookwormBroker
16:10
same
RoaldDahl
16:10
@HopefullyInLawSchool: what if i already got rejected. does it mean anything
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:12
@RoaldDahl: Likely not however it could mean nothing
RoaldDahl
16:15
So if it means nothing does that mean something?
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:17
Possibly
RoaldDahl
16:26
Cool
RoaldDahl
16:26
thank you!!!! i hope it means something
pinkandblue
16:31
fart
IrishDinosaur
16:36
Mich R gang lesgooo
Did anyone else get that random get to know nova email?
HopefullyInLawSchool
17:21
Ya it was sent to all YM applicants
starfishies
17:37
Anyone get the NDLS email inviting you to apply for something even though they haven’t made a decision on your app yet
17:38
Better yet I got the email and I was rejected last month
starfishies
17:38
Wtf
starfishies
17:39
and the deadline is in like a week what is this
any cardozo movement?
BatmanBeyond
18:01
Sent a LOCI via portal, but I'm wondering if email would have gotten me a swifter response
BatmanBeyond
18:02
This whole hold/wait-list/reserve system is a headache
loci already?
BatmanBeyond
18:09
If the odds are like 1-2% I don't think it matters much by the numbers
12:11
I got the same NDLS email
OrangeThing
12:18
I think the user profiles are broken
19:29
Any word out of Notre Dame?
19:29
Only the invitation to apply for LSE
19:29
Anyone received a decision from NDLS?
19:50
when did u guys apply that just heard from umich? they havent even glanced at my app yet
0:30
how am i supposed to spy on people when profile links are broken?
Right. Broken links smh
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.