Also known as: jurisdictional defects · lack of jurisdiction · jurisdictional error
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A flaw that deprives a court of authority to hear and decide a case or proceeding. Identification of the flaw requires dismissal even after extensive litigation or trial because the court never possessed power to adjudicate the matter.
Jerome Jackson served as personal representative under letters later found to rest on a jurisdictional defect in the probate court. Jung BioTech paid value for estate assets in good faith without actual knowledge of the flaw. The transaction stands as if the representative had acted with full authority.
Jason Jung sued Jacobs Shipping in federal court alleging diversity jurisdiction. Complete diversity never existed because one member of the plaintiff LLC shared citizenship with the defendant. The court dismissed the action for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction even after a full bench trial.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Jeanette Jensen challenged state legislative districts in federal court. The district court dismissed the complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The Supreme Court reversed on the ground that the claim presented a justiciable controversy under Article III.
Jada Jones obtained a final judgment that later became vulnerable under a new federal statute. The Court of Appeals held that the statute could not reopen the judgment. The Supreme Court affirmed that Congress lacked power to direct reopening of final judgments.
Jessica Jacobs sued police officers after a high-speed chase ended in gunfire. The officers asserted qualified immunity and moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The Supreme Court addressed the merits of the constitutional claim after confirming appellate jurisdiction.
Jorge Juarez sued a state agency and obtained policy changes without a court order. The plaintiff sought attorney fees under a federal civil-rights statute. The Supreme Court held that a jurisdictional defect prevented any fee award because no enforceable judgment or consent decree existed.
Yes. Federal courts must dismiss an action at any time they determine subject-matter jurisdiction is lacking. Complete diversity that never existed cannot be cured by the parties' litigation efforts or a completed trial.
Supporting sources
No. Lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is never waived and may be raised by a party or the court at any stage, including after trial. The court has an independent obligation to confirm its power to hear the case.
Supporting sources
No. A person who deals in good faith with a personal representative is protected even when a jurisdictional defect existed in the issuance of letters. The statute shields the transaction as if the representative had acted properly.
Supporting sources
Never. A dismissal for lack of jurisdiction is expressly excluded from the rule that converts a Rule 41(b) dismissal into an adjudication on the merits.
Supporting sources
…proceed because the matter is considered unsuited to judicial inquiry or adjustment. We treat the first ground of dismissal as "lack of jurisdiction of the subject matter." The second we consider to result in a failure to state a justiciable cause of action. The District Court's dismissal order recited that it was issued in conformity…