Also known as: diversity jurisdiction · diversity SMJ · 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A statutory grant of federal subject-matter jurisdiction over civil actions between citizens of different states or between a citizen of a state and a citizen or subject of a foreign state when the amount in controversy exceeds seventy-five thousand dollars exclusive of interest and costs.
Devon Drake, a citizen of State A, sued a limited partnership whose general partner resides in State A and whose limited partners reside in States B and C. The court examined the citizenship of every partner to decide whether complete diversity existed between the parties.
Diana Delgado sued a State B corporation in federal court under diversity jurisdiction for breach of a publishing contract. The court applied State A tort-damage standards to the state-law claim while exercising its diversity authority.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Darrell Duncan brought a negligence action against a State C railroad in federal court based on diversity. The court followed State A substantive law on the duty of care rather than any general federal common law.
David Dawson sued a State D bank in diversity for recovery on a note. The court applied the state statute of limitations because it would determine the outcome of the litigation.
Dwight Dorsey removed a contract dispute to federal court under diversity jurisdiction. The court applied a federal appellate rule on bond requirements instead of the conflicting state rule.
Dustin Donovan sued a State E corporation in a State F federal court under diversity jurisdiction despite a contractual forum-selection clause designating State E courts. The court enforced the clause as a procedural matter under federal law.
The citizenship of every partner must be considered. A partnership is a citizen of every state in which any of its partners is a citizen.
Supporting sources
The insurer is deemed a citizen of the same states as its insured. Complete diversity is destroyed if the plaintiff and the insured share citizenship.
Supporting sources
Separate and distinct claims of class members cannot be aggregated. At least one class representative must individually satisfy the jurisdictional amount.
Supporting sources
…an Argument for or against Abolishing Diversity of Citizenship Jurisdiction (1932) 18 A.B.A.J. 809; Ball, Revision of Federal Diversity Jurisdiction (1933) 28 Ill. L. Rev. 356, 362-64; Fordham, Swift v. Tyson and the Construction of State Statutes (1935) 41 W. Va. L.Q. 131. [^maj-7]: Compare Mr. Justice Miller in Gelpcke v. City of…