Originally Posted by FAX:
FYI, Mr. Internet Attorney ...
75k is the minimum you must demand in order for a case to be filed in Federal court. That is not the final demand and usually isn't.
An example is the case of the Nigerians vs. Jessie Smollett et al. in which they wanted to file in Federal court (due to the interstate aspect of the case ... which is the same situation here). They filed for 75k (the minimum). Once filed, the damages can be requested in court and awarded by the jury (or not ... as the case may be).
The 75k is meaningless in real terms.
FAX
yep corrected myself in a few other post my bad. [Reply]
Originally Posted by arrwheader:
yep corrected myself in a few other post my bad.
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.
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
So it has to do with our federal/state system. You can only get into federal court if you qualify. One way to qualify is if the parties are from different states (diversity jurisdiction). To qualify under those circumstances, they want to be certain the amount at issue is reasonably significant. The $75,000 isn't a magic number, just one that is set by statute. I have no doubt it has changed over the years.
If you can't check all the necessary boxes, then you must file in state court instead of federal. [Reply]
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. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Baby Lee:
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.
Originally Posted by Baby Lee:
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.
I was born conspiracy-minded and in the name of Chandra Dangi's Stepladder, I shall remain so, Mr. Baby Lee.
Besides, if I'm not mistaken, over 90% of Congress is comprised of attorneys. Therefore, lawyers do, in fact, set that 75k standard.
In the spirit of Amicus Curiae, put that in your jury box.
Originally Posted by FAX:
I was born conspiracy-minded and in the name of Chandra Dangi's Stepladder, I shall remain so, Mr. Baby Lee.
Besides, if I'm not mistaken, over 90% of Congress is comprised of attorneys. Therefore, lawyers do, in fact, set that 75k standard.
In the spirit of Amicus Curiae, put that in your jury box.
FAX
I meant the royal you, not you specifically, Mr. Fax the Quick to Offense.
But I mean yeah, if the more I point out how checks and balances and separation of powers and consensus and all that factors into a decision, the bigger one makes the conspiracy, we're just stuck in an endless loop. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Baby Lee:
I meant the royal you, not you specifically, Mr. Fax the Quick to Offense.
But I mean yeah, if the more I point out how checks and balances and separation of powers and consensus and all that factors into a decision, the bigger one makes the conspiracy, we're just stuck in an endless loop.
LOL ... I'm not taking offense. Not at all. No emotion. Just hard, cold facts, baby.
Because, as we all know, the legal world relies upon accuracy and specificity.
I said lawyers make the rule. You said it was Congress. I'm simply referring to the fact that Congress is ... well ... lawyers.
I rest my case ... while leaning back to smoke an Avo Double R.
