Quote:
Originally Posted by FAX
Had I taken the time to actually read through the entire thread, I would have left this alone, Mr. arrwheader. I even thought about deleting my post after reading further through the thread, but I didn't see any major grammatical errors, so I just ... couldn't ... do ... it.
Anyway, it's a confusing rule the Feds have. I suppose they do it in order to allow cases to proceed while reducing the number of frivolous lawsuits for a buck here and a ten-spot there. One would think the baseline would be higher, but attorneys make those rules and you know what attorneys are like. Any case is better than no case to those guys.
FAX
|
FTR, so you don't get conspiracyminded, the federal jurisdictional requirements are set by statute. This isn't a gentleman's agreement, or an informal rule ginned up by the judges, or the bar. It's United States Code, ie, voted on by Congress.
Wouldn't be surprised if the $75K number isn't revisited and revised sometime relatively soon, as it's not nearly the money it was when enacted.
But yeah, the purpose is to keep small local matters out of federal court.
The entirety of the jursidictional requirement isn't just the dollar amount though. You also have to involve entities of different states [if they're both from the same state, it's entirely state business], and the matter has to be filed in a federal court that has a connection to the issue at hand [ie, can't file a federal suit in a federal court in California for a car accident that happened in Maine, etc.].
So like, take Tracy Morgan's accident. NY resident, extensively injured in NJ by a GA truck driver working for an INTL corp HQed in AR. Claim filed in US Dist Ct, Dist of NJ.