Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

diversity jurisdiction

Read a random definition: implied partnership

A quick definition of diversity jurisdiction:

Diversity jurisdiction is a way for a federal court to hear a case. It happens when the amount of money involved is more than $75,000 and the people involved are from different states. If a company is involved, it is considered a citizen of the state where it was created and where it does most of its business. In class action lawsuits, only one person needs to be from a different state than the defendant. Even if diversity jurisdiction is possible, the case can still be heard in state court. If a defendant wants to move the case to federal court, they can do so. The federal court must follow the laws of the state where it is located. This is called the Erie doctrine.

A more thorough explanation:

Diversity jurisdiction is a way for a federal court to have the power to hear a case. It is one of two ways, the other being federal question jurisdiction.

For a federal court to have diversity jurisdiction, two things must be true:

  1. The amount of money involved in the case must be more than $75,000.
  2. The people involved in the case must be from different states.

For example, if someone from California sues someone from New York for $100,000, a federal court could hear the case because there is diversity jurisdiction.

However, if someone from California sues someone else from California for $100,000, a federal court could not hear the case because there is no diversity jurisdiction.

It's important to note that if diversity jurisdiction exists, the defendant can choose to move the case from state court to federal court.

Also, if there is a class action lawsuit, the rules for diversity jurisdiction are a little different. In that case, only one person needs to be from a different state than the defendant for the federal court to have jurisdiction.

Finally, if a federal court has diversity jurisdiction, it must follow the laws of the state where the case is being heard.

For example, if a federal court in California hears a case because of diversity jurisdiction, it must follow California law.

diversion | diversity of citizenship

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
texaslawhopefully
22:30
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That all sounds great. It sounds like it has fairly diverse cuisine for a smaller city
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.