Subject Matter Jurisdiction
← Previous lessonNext lesson →
Civil Procedure · Lesson 01
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
這一課問的是：聯邦法院是否有「事項管轄」— 多元、聯邦問題、或附屬管轄？
ActorActObjectStandardConsequence
Visual Scene · the picture in your head
Issue. Does the federal court have authority to hear this case — under diversity, federal question, or supplemental jurisdiction?
這一課問的是：聯邦法院是否有「事項管轄」— 多元、聯邦問題、或附屬管轄？
Core Terminology · 7 must-know
Tap a card to flip and reveal the meaning.
subject matter jurisdiction
Tap to see meaning
Court's power over the type of case.
事項管轄。
diversity jurisdiction
Tap to see meaning
§1332: complete diversity + >$75,000.
多元管轄。
complete diversity
Tap to see meaning
All Ps from different states than all Ds (Strawbridge).
完全多元。
federal question
Tap to see meaning
§1331: arising under federal law on face of complaint.
聯邦問題。
well-pleaded complaint
Tap to see meaning
Federal issue must appear in P's claim, not anticipated defense.
完善起訴狀規則。
supplemental jurisdiction
Tap to see meaning
§1367: related claims sharing common nucleus of operative fact.
附屬管轄。
amount in controversy
Tap to see meaning
Aggregate by single P against single D; not across parties.
爭執金額。
Issue · what this lesson is really about
Does the federal court have authority to hear this case — under diversity, federal question, or supplemental jurisdiction?
這一課問的是：聯邦法院是否有「事項管轄」— 多元、聯邦問題、或附屬管轄？
Trigger words & phrases that should flag this issue:
diversityfederal questionamount in controversyarising undersupplemental
Expression Bank · how lawyers actually say it
Six function → sentence patterns. Use these in essay applications.
| Function | English sentence | 中文 |
|---|---|---|
| Apply diversity | §1332 requires complete diversity and amount > $75,000. | §1332 要求完全多元與 >$75,000。 |
| Apply federal question | Federal issue must arise in well-pleaded complaint. | 聯邦問題須出現於完善起訴狀。 |
| Apply supplemental | §1367 extends to claims forming part of same case or controversy. | §1367 對同一案件爭議之相關訴求延伸。 |
| Limit §1367(b) | In diversity, no §1367 for claims by Ps against persons joined under Rule 14, 19, 20, 24. | 於多元中，§1367(b) 限制 P 對 Rule 14/19/20/24 加入之人。 |
Rule Sentence · the workhorse
Federal subject matter jurisdiction exists where the case (1) arises under federal law in a well-pleaded complaint, (2) is between citizens of different states with amount in controversy exceeding $75,000 with complete diversity, or (3) qualifies for supplemental jurisdiction under §1367 by sharing a common nucleus of operative fact with a jurisdictionally proper claim.
Sentence Anatomy · 5 roles, 5 colors
Every rule sentence breaks into five visual roles.
Actor 行為人plaintiff invoking federal court援用聯邦法院之原告
Act 行為filing a claim提起請求
Object 對象federal-court jurisdiction聯邦管轄
Standard 法律標準§1331 · §1332 · §1367§1331 / §1332 / §1367
Consequence 後果jurisdiction or dismissal管轄或駁回
Casebook Snapshot · a real American case
Strawbridge v. Curtiss
Holding. For diversity jurisdiction under §1332, every plaintiff must be a citizen of a state different from every defendant; presence of even one party on each side from the same state defeats diversity.
Why it matters. Strawbridge established the bright-line rule: ALL plaintiffs must be diverse from ALL defendants.
Strawbridge：完全多元 — 所有 P 與所有 D 之州皆須不同。
Common Mistakes · what trips students
✗ 一個 P 與一個 D 之州不同即完全多元。
✓ Complete diversity requires ALL Ps from different states than ALL Ds.
完全多元須所有 P 與所有 D 之州皆不同。
✗ anticipated defense 之聯邦問題即可成立 SMJ。
✓ Federal issue must appear in well-pleaded complaint.
須在完善起訴狀。
✗ amount in controversy 可跨 Ps 聚合。
✓ Generally single-P-single-D aggregation only.
通常僅單 P 對單 D 聚合。
Mini IRAC · build the Application
Issue. Does the federal court have diversity jurisdiction over a contract claim brought by a New York citizen against a California citizen for $100,000?
Rule. Diversity jurisdiction under §1332 requires complete diversity of citizenship and amount in controversy exceeding $75,000.
Application (model). P is a NY citizen suing D, a CA citizen, for $100,000. Because §1332 requires complete diversity between every plaintiff and every defendant plus more than $75,000 in controversy, the fact that P and D are citizens of different states and the amount exceeds $75,000 means both requirements are met.
Pick the right element for each blank:
g1.
g2.
g3.
Conclusion. Therefore, the federal court has diversity subject matter jurisdiction.
MBE Check · multiple choice
A NY citizen sues a CA citizen in federal court for $50,000 on a state contract claim. Diversity jurisdiction?
Mini Essay · write the Application paragraph
Facts. P, a citizen of New Jersey, sues D-1 (NY) and D-2 (NJ) in federal court for federal civil-rights claims under §1983. The complaint also includes related state-law negligence claims.
Call. Does the federal court have SMJ over both claims?
Practice Drill · tap to build the rule
Drop the chips here in correct order:
Tap chips to add → tap chips in the target to remove: