This week we take a look at one of the two primary jurisdictional means by which a case may be brought in federal court – id est federal diversity jurisdiction. In addition, we examine what has been referred to as the “Gaping Hole Problem” in diversity jurisdiction that arises from the potential exercise of supplemental jurisdiction. We also examine the approach the D.C. Circuit took in In re Lorazepam & Clorazepate Antitrust Litigation in handling a case in which the presence of nondiverse parties threatened to defeat federal diversity jurisdiction.
Firefox recommends the PDF Plugin for Mac OS X for viewing PDF documents in your browser.
We can also show you Legal Updates using the Google Viewer; however, you will need to be logged into Google Docs to view them.
Please choose one of the above to proceed!
LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.
Civil Procedure Updates, Civil Remedies Updates, Personal Injury Updates
DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
© Pavlack Law, LLC | Attorney Advertising