Removal and supplemental jurisdiction Practice Questions

Question 1

Using only the supplied file and legal resources, prepare a persuasive memorandum assessing whether Harbor Medical Supply LLC should move to remand the removed action to state court. Address federal-question jurisdiction, diversity citizenship, the amount in controversy, removal procedure, the strongest defense arguments, and the factual investigation that should occur before filing.

Question 2

Question 3

Using only the supplied file and legal resources, prepare an objective memorandum to the supervising attorney assessing Park's jury-demand deadline, the effect of the proposed new claim on jury rights, the likely amendment ruling, and the improvements needed in the motion.

Question 4

Using only the supplied file and legal resources, prepare a persuasive memorandum supporting Greenway Analytics's motion for leave to amend its complaint to add a fraudulent-inducement claim against DataForge, Inc.

Question 5

Question 6

Question 7

A citizen of State A sued a corporation incorporated and headquartered in State B in federal court under diversity jurisdiction, seeking $500,000 for injuries caused by an allegedly defective product. State A law permits compensatory damages but provides that punitive damages are unavailable in product-liability actions. No federal statute or Federal Rule addresses the availability of punitive damages. The plaintiff nevertheless requested punitive damages, arguing that federal courts traditionally exercise discretion over remedies and that allowing punitive damages would encourage careful manufacturing. The corporation moved to strike the punitive-damages request. Which of the following is the strongest argument supporting the corporation's motion?

Accepted Answer

The state restriction governs because it defines the available remedy and disregarding it could produce materially different outcomes in state and federal court.

Answer

The state restriction governs because federal courts must apply every state rule whenever jurisdiction is based solely on diversity of citizenship.

Answer

Federal law governs because the requested relief appears in a pleading, and pleading matters are necessarily procedural under federal law.

Answer

Federal law governs because a federal court may disregard state law when the court believes a different remedy would advance deterrence.

Question 8

A citizen of State A purchased an electric bicycle through a retailer's interactive website while at home in State A. The retailer is incorporated and has its principal place of business in State B. It has no property or employees in State A, but it ships hundreds of bicycles there annually, advertises free delivery to State A, and provides remote warranty service to State A customers. The bicycle's battery allegedly malfunctioned while the customer was riding near her home in State A, causing serious injuries. She sued the retailer in a federal district court in State A, seeking $180,000 under state products-liability law. The retailer timely moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Which of the following is the customer's strongest argument that the court may exercise personal jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

The court may exercise specific jurisdiction because the claim arises from the retailer's deliberate sales and support activities directed to the forum state.

Answer

The court may exercise general jurisdiction because substantial recurring sales make the retailer at home in every state where it conducts business.

Answer

The court lacks personal jurisdiction because the customer's injury occurred outside the forum state, even though the product was purchased and used there.

Answer

The court lacks personal jurisdiction unless the retailer owns property or maintains employees in the forum state.

Removal and supplemental jurisdiction — MCQs

Removal and supplemental jurisdiction — MCQs

Want unlimited practice?