Civil Procedure, Erie Doctrine, Removal, Fraudulent Misjoinders, Federalism, Damage Stipulations, Diversity Jurisdiction, Snap Removals, Abstention, Docket, Forum, Remand
Diversity jurisdiction authorizes federal courts to act as impartial tribunals over certain matters of state law. To preserve states' judicial sovereignty, the US Supreme Court has prohibited diversity courts from directly interpreting state law, holding that federal courts must "predict" the legal outcome as if a state court had adjudicated. However, litigant abuse hinders consistency in legal outcomes. Discrepancies between courts spur forum shopping, which cyclically generates more legal incongruence. This paper identifies a "toxic cycle" plaguing diversity jurisdiction and offers five prescriptions which courts and Congress must use to reverse it.
BYU ScholarsArchive Citation
Nelson, Baerett and Roedel, Gavyn
"Acid Rain: Detoxifying Diversity Jurisdiction’s Poisonous Cycle,"
Brigham Young University Prelaw Review: Vol. 36, Article 14.
Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/byuplr/vol36/iss1/14