Assignment Overview Unit 1
Case Scenario 1
Actions by Billy and Edward fall under criminal law because the two individuals committed a crime against the state, by robbing a bank in Wichita Falls. As such, Texas would likely file the lawsuit against the two culprits. Although the constitution vests judicial power to federal and state courts to preside over criminal cases, the state court would, in this scenario, possess jurisdiction over the claim because it falls outside the diversity jurisdiction of federal courts.
The state court would seemingly possess jurisdiction over the case involving Billy and Edward because it falls outside the diversity jurisdiction of federal courts. As the literature suggests, the state judicial power extends to claims that fall outside the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts (Tarr, 2015). In this context, the case fails to meet the criteria required to be preceded over by the federal courts in several ways, making it subject to the state’s court jurisdiction. For instance, the United States Constitution provides that a plaintiff of one State can file a lawsuit in federal court when the defendant is located in a different state. In this scenario, it would be possible for the federal court to preside over the case as Billy and Edward were apprehended in Oklahoma while the actual crime occurred in Wichita, Texas.
Nonetheless, the constitution makes further provisions on the diversity jurisdiction. Notably, it provides that criminal cases cannot be brought under diversity jurisdiction in a federal court (“Introduction to the Federal,” n.d.). This aspect implies that only the federal government can file a criminal lawsuit in federal courts. Taking this provision into consideration, the federal court would not have the jurisdiction to preside over the criminal lawsuit filed by the Texas states. Therefore, the fact that the case falls outside the jurisdiction of the federal court implies that it would be presided over by the state court.
Case Scenario 2
The car accident involving Malia, Kevin, and a Honolulu resident falls under the category of a civil case because the actions of one party caused harm to others. Notably, the Honolulu resident rear-ended Malia and Kevin, causing injuries that led to the hospitalization of the latter. If Malia and Kevin wish to sue the resident, their case would likely be presided over by the state court in which the accident occurred. However, the injured party and the defendant are from different states, making the lawsuit an exception to state jurisdiction, and part of the power of the federal state, under the diversity jurisdiction.
The federal court would possess jurisdiction over the mentioned case under the diversity jurisdiction. The diversity jurisdiction of the federal court “allows a plaintiff of one state to file a lawsuit in a federal court when the defendant is located in a different state” (“Introduction to the Federal,” n.d.). From the case scenario, the plaintiff, Malia, and Kevin, and the defendant, a Honolulu resident, are from different states. Thus, the federal court has jurisdiction over the case. The fact that the case involves a civil lawsuit and meets the criteria of diversity jurisdiction implies that it falls under the jurisdiction of the federal court.
Furthermore, the case also meets the “amount in controversy” required to file a state law claim in federal courts. Notably, the law requires that the amount in controversy must be more than $75,000 for a state law claim to be filed in federal court. In this context, the amount in controversy is seemingly more than $75,000 as the two plaintiffs require extensive surgery for back and neck injuries, not to forget damages to the car. For these reasons, the federal court would possess jurisdiction over their case.
Case Scenario 3
The case filed by Chiquita on behalf of Jane would qualify as a civil lawsuit because it involves actions by an individual that cause harm to another. Notably, Jane was allegedly discriminated for being pregnant and fired from her position despite receiving stellar yearly reviews. While Jane would face legal problems with filing the case, the lawsuit would likely be presented in a state court because it involves a legal employment dispute.
The case by Chiquita would be filed in a state court because it entails a legal dispute. As the literature suggests, the state judicial power extends to claims that fall outside the jurisdiction of federal courts and encompasses legal disputes (Tarr, 2015). In this context, the case covers a legal employment dispute as the local law firm’s attorney appears to have fired Jane based on the fact that she was pregnant. Besides, every state in the United States has different laws that govern employment. Therefore, this particular case would be tried in a state court in which the employment dispute occurred.
Based on the existing plaintiff and defendant guidelines, Chiquita would face legal problems with filing the lawsuit on behalf of Chiquita. The law requires that only representatives, such as guardians or lawyers, have the legal capacity to file a lawsuit on behalf of another individual (“Rule 17,” n.d.). An analysis of the case shows that Chiquita is not Jane’s representative; hence, she lacks the legal capacity to file the lawsuit.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama is the federal district court in the area in which I reside. Congress created the court through the power vested in it by the US constitution. The 11th circuit is the local state circuit court in Alabama. At the same time, the Northern District of Alabama court serves as the local federal district court in the region.
“Introduction to the federal court system” (N.d.). United States Department of Justice. https://www.justice.gov/usao/justice-101/federal-courts
“Rule 17: Plaintiff and defendant; capacity; public officers” (n.d.). Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_17
“United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit” (n.d.). US Courts. http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/
“United States District Court Northern District of Alabama” (n.d.). US Courts. https://www.alnd.uscourts.gov/
Tarr, G.A. (2015). Judicial federalism in the United States: Structure, jurisdiction, and operation. Journal of Constitutional Research, 2(3), 7-34. https://doi.org/10.5380/rinc.v2i3.44526