Also known as: matters in controversy
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
An underlying legal dispute or proceeding that supplies the factual and legal core for assessing whether a judge must disqualify from a case. The term identifies the specific controversy in which prior representation, association with counsel, or economic interests of the judge or household family members may require recusal under judicial ethics rules.
An underlying legal dispute or proceeding that supplies the factual and legal core for assessing whether a judge must disqualify from a case. The term identifies the specific controversy in which prior representation, association with counsel, or economic interests of the judge or household family members may require recusal under judicial ethics rules.
Marcus Mitchell's parent recently moved into his household and holds a contingent option to purchase a unit in a condominium project at a discounted price. The option expires if a zoning appeal blocks the project. When the appeal reaches Judge Mitchell's court, the parent's economic stake in the outcome requires the judge to step aside because the household family member possesses an economic interest in the subject matter in controversy.
The value of the claim or relief demanded in a civil action that determines whether a federal court possesses subject-matter jurisdiction under diversity or other statutory grants. The term measures the monetary threshold that must be satisfied for original jurisdiction in cases such as class actions and certain commerce disputes.
Mina Mehta leads a class of consumers alleging defective products against Matrix Technologies. The aggregated claims total more than five million dollars. Because the matter in controversy exceeds the statutory minimum, the federal district court possesses original jurisdiction over the class action.
The value of the claim or relief demanded in a civil action that determines whether a federal court possesses subject-matter jurisdiction under diversity or other statutory grants. The term measures the monetary threshold that must be satisfied for original jurisdiction in cases such as class actions and certain commerce disputes.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Maya Malik sues a pharmaceutical company over injuries from a drug. Judge Lopez is assigned the case. Five years earlier, while at a law firm, another partner at that firm drafted strategy memos defending the same company on identical labeling claims. Because the partner participated substantially in the matter in controversy during Judge Lopez's association with the firm, the judge must disqualify herself.
A judge must disqualify when she was associated with a lawyer who participated substantially in the same matter in controversy during that association. The key inquiry is whether the earlier work and the current proceeding share the same underlying controversy, not whether the judge personally handled the matter.
Yes. A judge must step aside when she knows that a parent or other household family member holds an economic interest in the subject matter in controversy. The interest need not be vested or substantial. It is enough that the family member's financial stake depends on the outcome of the proceeding.
Yes. When a judge serves as trustee or managing fiduciary and knows the entity holds an economic interest in a party, the judge must disqualify. The rule treats the fiduciary interest the same as a personal interest for disqualification purposes.
Mason McCarthy, a citizen of one state, sues Melanie Morris, a citizen of another state, seeking damages of eighty thousand dollars for breach of contract. The matter in controversy surpasses the required threshold, allowing the federal court to exercise diversity jurisdiction.
Ming Ma brings a constitutional claim against federal agents seeking fifteen thousand dollars in damages. The matter in controversy meets the statutory amount, supporting federal jurisdiction under the general federal-question statute.
Marathon Logistics challenges a state agricultural rule that burdens interstate shipments. The matter in controversy exceeds ten thousand dollars, satisfying the amount requirement for original jurisdiction in an action arising under a federal commerce statute.
In class actions the claims of individual class members are aggregated to determine whether the matter in controversy exceeds five million dollars exclusive of interest and costs. Once that threshold is met, the district court has original jurisdiction under the statute.
…§ 1332. To ensure that diversity jurisdiction does not flood the federal courts with minor disputes, § 1332(a) requires that the matter in controversy in a diversity case exceed a specified amount, currently $75,000. Although the district courts may not exercise jurisdiction absent a statutory basis, it is well established—in certain…