Federal Law Flashcards

A plaintiff sues a defendant in federal court alleging only state law claims. The defendant is a citizen of a different state. The plaintiff's damages are $60,000. The federal court:

Answer: Lacks jurisdiction because the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000

Federal diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 requires complete diversity of citizenship AND an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000; exactly $60,000 does not satisfy the threshold.

A state prisoner files a federal habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Under AEDPA, a federal court may grant relief only if the state court decision was:

Answer: Contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court

Under AEDPA, federal habeas relief is available only if the state court's adjudication was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as determined by the U.S. Supreme Court, or was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.

To establish standing to sue in federal court, a plaintiff must demonstrate:

Answer: Injury in fact, causation traceable to defendant's conduct, and redressability by a favorable ruling

Article III standing requires (1) a concrete injury in fact, (2) that is fairly traceable to the defendant's challenged conduct, and (3) that is likely to be redressed by a favorable court decision.

Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff suing a local government entity (municipality) must allege that the constitutional violation resulted from:

Answer: The municipality's official policy or custom that caused the violation

Under Monell v. Department of Social Services, a municipality is liable under § 1983 only when the constitutional violation results from the municipality's official policy or longstanding custom.

The Eleventh Amendment generally bars suits in federal court against a state by:

Answer: Citizens of another state or foreign country seeking money damages without state consent

The Eleventh Amendment bars federal court suits for money damages brought by private citizens against a state without the state's consent, including suits by citizens of another state or foreign nation.

The federal well-pleaded complaint rule for federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 requires that:

Answer: The federal question appears on the face of the plaintiff's complaint, not in an anticipated defense

Under the well-pleaded complaint rule, federal question jurisdiction exists only when a federal question appears on the face of the plaintiff's well-pleaded complaint, not merely in an anticipated federal defense.

Under the abstention doctrine of Younger v. Harris, a federal court must abstain from interfering with a pending state criminal proceeding when:

Answer: There is a pending state proceeding, the state has an important interest, and the plaintiff has an adequate opportunity to raise federal claims in state court

Younger abstention is required when there is (1) an ongoing state criminal or quasi-criminal proceeding, (2) the state has an important interest in enforcing its laws, and (3) the federal plaintiff can adequately raise constitutional claims in state court.