CT Bar Civil Procedure: Jurisdiction 5

Question 1

A plaintiff files suit in Connecticut federal court combining a federal RICO claim with a state tort claim arising from the same facts. The RICO claim is later dismissed. What happens to subject matter jurisdiction over the state claim?

Accepted Answer

The court has discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c) to decline supplemental jurisdiction and may remand the state claim

Answer

Under § 1367(c)(3), a court may decline supplemental jurisdiction when it has dismissed all claims over which it had original jurisdiction, giving it discretion rather than requiring automatic dismissal.

Question 2

A defendant was never personally served in Connecticut and had no contacts with the state. The plaintiff obtained a default judgment against the defendant in Connecticut by attaching the defendant's bank account in Connecticut. Under Shaffer v. Heitner, is this judgment constitutionally valid?

Accepted Answer

No, because Shaffer held that quasi in rem jurisdiction must also satisfy the minimum contacts standard of International Shoe

Answer

Shaffer v. Heitner (1977) held that the presence of property alone is insufficient to confer jurisdiction; the minimum contacts test of International Shoe applies to all forms of jurisdiction, including quasi in rem.

Question 3

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1441, a defendant seeking to remove a civil action from Connecticut Superior Court to the District of Connecticut must file the notice of removal within:

Accepted Answer

30 days of receipt of the initial pleading or service of summons, whichever is shorter

Answer

Section 1446(b) requires the notice of removal to be filed within 30 days after the defendant receives the initial pleading or after service of summons if that occurs first.

Question 4

A plaintiff brings a class action in Connecticut federal court under diversity jurisdiction. Named plaintiff is a Connecticut citizen; one unnamed class member is also a citizen of the same state as the defendant. Under Zahn v. International Paper Co., what is the rule for amount in controversy in diversity class actions?

Accepted Answer

Each class member must individually satisfy the $75,000 amount in controversy requirement, absent the Class Action Fairness Act

Answer

Zahn held that in traditional diversity class actions, each class member must independently satisfy the amount in controversy requirement, though CAFA created an exception for large consumer class actions.

Question 5

Which of the following contacts would most likely satisfy the 'purposeful availment' prong of the specific personal jurisdiction analysis under Hanson v. Denckla?

Accepted Answer

A defendant who solicited customers in Connecticut by sending targeted mailings and then entered contracts with Connecticut residents

Answer

Hanson requires that the defendant itself purposefully avail itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum; unilateral acts by the plaintiff or incidental contacts do not suffice.

(CT Bar) Connecticut Bar Exam Practice Test

(CT Bar) Connecticut Bar Exam Practice Test

CT Bar Civil Procedure: Jurisdiction 5