Subject Matter Jurisdiction

SCOTUS held congress may authorize federal district courts to hear some diversity cases, not others

(a) District courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where matter in controversy exceeds sum of value of \$75,000, exclusive of interest and cost, and is between--
(1) citizens of different states
(2) citizens of a state or of a foreign state, except district 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 residents in US and are domiciled in same State;
(3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties; and
(4) Foreign state, defined in section 1603(a) of this title, as PL and citizens of a State or different States.

Courts hold a person doesn't lose her old domicile until she acquires a new one

Courts state it's enough party "intends to make new state home and person has no present intention of going elsewhere to live.

Holes didn't acquire new domicile b/c he was only there for specific time, one year for his job, and he would've had to move elsewhere to continue his job. Might've been different if there'd been a plant in state.

To establish domicile of choice a person generally must be physically present at location and intend to make it home for time at least.--This test is generally rejected for "indefinite intent" test.

Parties must be diverse on day complaint is filed. If parties are diverse on that date, case is a proper diversity case, even if parties weren't diverse at time events giving rise to claim, or later in litigation

Complete diversity of parties required in order to obtain diversity jurisdiction ; that is, no party on one side may be a citizen of same state as any party on other side

a natural person must be both a citizen of US and domiciliary of that State. For diversity purposes, citizen ship means domicile, mere residence in State isn't sufficient.

A change of domicile may be effected only by combination of two elements:

(a) taking up residence in a different domicile w/
(b) Intention to remain there.

his true, fixed and permanent home and principal establishment, and to which he has intention of returning whenever he is absent therefrom.

(a) District courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where matter in controversy exceeds sum or value or \$75000, exclusive or interest and costs, and is between--(2) citizens of a state and citizens or subjects of a foreign state, except 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 US and are domiciled in same State; (3) citizens of different States and in which citizens or subjects of a foreign state are additional parties....

SCOTUS has long held diversity statute doesn't authorize jurisdiction over domestic relation cases.

e.g. not all claims among family members are barred simple b/c they arise out of marital relationship

SCOTUS initially rejected idea a corporation could invoke diversity jurisdiction under Article III, Sec. 2. However, increased use of corporate device as means of doing business and desire of these corporations to resort to federal courts proved irresistible. SCOTUS reversed itself, holding a corporation could invoke diversity jurisdiction of federal courts.

Initially court held corporations would be viewed as citizens of state in which they were incorporated, that is, state that grants them their corporate charter, allowing them to operate as a corporation under laws of chartering state. -->28 U.S.C (c)(1)

Provides corporation shall be deemed a citizen of every state and foreign state by which its been incorporated and state or foreign state where its principal place of business.

"never center test"--Hertz Corp; Daily operations; business activity; total activity; center of gravity

Corporate headquarters was deemed corporations principal place of business.

partnerships and unincorporated associations have been treated as groups of individual litigants, not as corporations. If they are formed as corporations but acts as partnerships they are still treated like corporations. But if they're not formed as a corporations and still acts as one they're treated like partnerships.

Removed to federal court improperly, since there was a non-diverse DF. Before trial, non-diverse DF settles, thus perfecting diversity.

PL's claim for more than required amount will generally be accepted, if it appears to be made in good faith, unless it appears to legal certainty claim is really for less than jurisdictional amount.

Second PL who doesn't meet amount requirement may join first since he meets amount requirement.