A citizen of State A filed a negligence action against a State B defendant in a State A state court after a traffic accident in State A, seeking $200,000 in damages. The plaintiff immediately served the defendant with process. Fifty-nine days later, the defendant removed the case to federal district court. The plaintiff then timely filed a motion in the federal court to remand the case back to state court. How should the court rule on the plaintiff’s motion to remand?

A citizen of State A was killed in a car accident caused by a motorist who was also a citizen of State A. A citizen of State B is executor of the decedent’s estate. The executor files a complaint in federal court in State A asserting a wrongful death claim against the motorist. The motorist files a motion to dismiss on the basis of lack of subject matter jurisdiction.How should the court rule?

A professor who is a citizen of State A brought an action against his employer, a university, located in State B. The case was brought in State B state court for patent infringement, alleging that the university had improperly marketed a medical device for which the professor had obtained a patent. The professor claims $100,000 in damages for the patent infringement claim.The professor joined this claim with a breach of contract action for $50,000, which was the amount of payment to which he was entitled for designing an unrelated robotic device for the university’s engineering department.If the university wants to have the case heard in federal court, what is the best method for doing so?

A resident of State B was injured in the Southern District of State A when her car was struck by a large transport truck. At the time of the accident, the truck driver was acting in the course of his employment for a large retail corporation, which owned the truck. The plaintiff intends to file a negligence action in federal district court against both the truck driver and the retail corporation. The truck driver is domiciled in the Central District of State A. The retail corporation is a State C corporation, but has its principal place of business in a city in the District of State D. The corporation operates close to 100 stores in a number of states, including 20 stores in the Southern District of State A.  In which federal district court(s) is venue proper?

The plaintiff sued a builder in federal court on state law claims relating to alleged construction defects. The plaintiff, a citizen and resident of State A, purchased a new home from a builder. Within months, the home developed moisture and mold problems and is no longer habitable. The builder is a limited partnership consisting of four general partners who are citizens of State B and two limited partners, one a citizen of State A and one a citizen of State C. The builder moves to dismiss the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.  Will the builder’s motion be granted?

FRCP Rule 9 states rules for Pleading Special Matters. Section (b) gives the rule for pleadings related to Fraud or Mistake; Conditions of Mind. In alleging fraud or mistake, a party must:

A plaintiff, a citizen of Ontario, Canada, sues a defendant, a citizen of State A, on a note for $80,000 in federal court in State A.  On what basis does the federal court have subject matter jurisdiction?

A car manufacturer, incorporated in State A with its principal place of business also therein, sold its cars to dealers nationwide. A buyer who resides in State B bought one of the manufacturer’s cars in State B. The buyer then took the car on a cross-country trip. Halfway through the trip, the buyer was involved in an accident in State C with a driver who resided in that state. The accident investigator concluded that the cause of the accident arose from a steering defect in the car.The driver filed an action against the buyer and the manufacturer in State C federal court, claiming $100,000 in damages. State C has an unlimited long arm statute that authorizes personal jurisdiction to the extent permitted by the Constitution. The manufacturer filed a motion to dismiss the driver’s action based on lack of personal jurisdiction. Should the court grant the motion to dismiss?

A wealthy married couple living in State A mutually agreed that the marriage was not working out. The wife subsequently moved to State B. Approximately two years after moving to State B, the wife filed a divorce action in the United States District Court for the District of State A. As stated in the complaint filed in the matter, the marital estate that will be divided in the divorce is worth over $5 million. The husband filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Should the motion to dismiss be granted?

Mr. Saver from State A filed a federal court action in State A against his financial adviser who had his business in State B. The financial advisor was served in his office in State B. The complaint was left with an employee standing in the hallway in front of the financial adviser’s office. The financial advisor filed an answer to the complaint and in it raised the affirmative defense of improper service of process. Assume that both states’ requirements for service of process are the same those found in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.  Should the court dismiss the complaint for improper service of process?