Also known as: subject matter jurisdiction · subject-matter jurisdiction · SMJ
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A court's authority to hear and decide a case because the claim falls within the category of disputes the court is empowered to adjudicate. This power is determined by statute or constitutional provision and exists independently of the parties' consent or the merits of the claim. A court lacking this authority must dismiss the action whenever the defect is identified.
Jose Jimenez filed a contract suit in federal court against Jiang Textiles. After discovery revealed that both parties were citizens of the same state, the judge examined the record and concluded that diversity jurisdiction never existed. The court dismissed the entire action even though trial was imminent.
June Jiang, a citizen of State A, sued Jorge Juarez, a citizen of State B, in federal court asserting diversity jurisdiction. Juarez later moved to State A. The court retained jurisdiction because complete diversity existed on the date the complaint was filed.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Jada Jones sued Jenkins Apparel in state court. The defendant removed the case to federal court. When the court later determined that the amount in controversy fell below the jurisdictional threshold, it remanded the action to state court.
Jeffrey Jha sued Jones Petroleum in federal court. The defendant filed a motion under Rule 12(b)(1) asserting that the complaint presented only state-law claims and raised no federal question. The court considered the motion and dismissed the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
James Johnson sued Juarez Holdings in state court on a state-law contract claim. The complaint mentioned a possible federal defense the defendant might raise. The federal court held that the reference did not create federal-question jurisdiction and dismissed the removed action.
A state official faced a federal injunction proceeding. The federal court had already asserted jurisdiction over the underlying dispute. It continued to exercise that jurisdiction to the exclusion of state criminal proceedings that sought to enforce the same challenged statute.
A court must dismiss an action at any time it determines that subject-matter jurisdiction is lacking. The defect cannot be waived by the parties and may be raised by the court on its own motion even after trial has begun.
Supporting sources
No. Diversity jurisdiction is measured at the time the suit is instituted. Later changes in domicile do not divest a federal court of jurisdiction that attached when the complaint was filed.
Supporting sources
The district court must remand the case to state court. The remand order is generally not reviewable on appeal, although costs and attorney fees may be awarded against the removing party.
Supporting sources
No. A complaint that asserts only state-law claims does not arise under federal law merely because it anticipates a federal defense the defendant might raise.
Supporting sources
…which is the subject matter of inquiry in a suit already pending in a Federal court, the latter court having first obtained jurisdiction over the subject matter, has the right, in both civil and criminal cases, to hold and maintain such jurisdiction, to the exclusion of all other courts, until its duty is fully performed. Prout v. Starr , 188 U.S.…