Wednesday audio--Section A, Section B. Essay # 5 will post at noon tomorrow and will be due in class on Thursday, April 4.
One final point on Summary Judgment: There is a third, rarer situation in which it might be "beyond peradventure" that a movant with the burden of persuasion and initial burden of production is entitled to summary judgment: When the movant presents overwhelming evidence from the nonmovant and the nonmovant's witnesses, such that the nonmovant cannot attack or undermine its own evidence. We saw this in Dominion v. Fox News, a defamation action over statements about Dominion voting machines and the 2020 election; the case settled for $ 768 million. Dominion sought and won summary judgment because emails and text messages from Fox employees and on-air personalities and the deposition testimony of those officials showed they knew their statements were false; Fox could not counter evidence from its own witnesses. Again, this is fairly rare.
We continue with Diversity Jurisdiction; prep the entire section, which will take us through our (some form of) double session on Friday. Review your notes (from the second day of the semester) on the basic structure of the federal judiciary and the difference between exclusive jurisdiction and concurrent jurisdiction.
• What is the constitutional structure of the federal judiciary? What does Article III tell us about the jurisdiction of the federal courts? What doesn't it tell us about the jurisdiction of the federal courts? What is the connection between Article III and the various statutes, such as § 1331 and § 1332?
• What is the purpose or rationale behind diversity jurisdiction?
• A(FL) sues X (NY) in federal court in Louisiana; is there subject matter jurisdiction?
• What is complete diversity and minimal diversity? What is required, by what source of law, and why? How does that requirement relate to the purposes of diversity jurisdiction? What is the argument in favor of minimal diversity and what are the problems with that argument, given the purposes of diversity jurisdiction?
• What is the statutory basis for jurisdiction in Mas and why? Why is it necessary to consider the citizenship of Mr. and Mrs. Mas?
• Consider whether there is complete, minimal, or no diversity in the following:
• A (FL) v X (FL)
• A (FL) v. X (NY)
• A (FL) v. X (NY) & Y (FL)
• A (CA) v. X (NY) & Y (MN)
• A (NY) & B (FL) v. X (NJ) & Y (FL)
• A (NY) & B (FL) v. X (NJ) & Y (IL)
• A (NY) & B (NY) v. X (CA) & Y (CA)
• A (NY) v. Audi (Ger) & VWA (NJ) & WorldWide (NY) & Seaway (NY)
• What is domicile? What is change of domicile? What facts and evidence can parties use to prove domicile?
• Consider the bases for jurisdiction of the following:
• A (PR) v. X (DC)
• A (Cuba) v. X (FL)
• A (Cuba) v. X (Venezuela)
• A (TX) & B (China) v. X (Taiwan)
• A (TX) & B (FL) v. X (Taiwan) & Y (FL)
• A (Cuba/Lawful permanent resident domiciled in FL) v. X (FL)
• A (NY) v. X (US Citizen domiciled in France)
