Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Exxon Corp v. Allapattah Services

Docket No.: 04-70
Certiorari Granted: 10/12/2004
Argued: March 1, 2005
Decided: June 23, 2005
Consolidated with: 04-7990

Topics:

Judicial Power, Article I, Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, res judicata

PartyNames: Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Allapattah Services, Inc., et al.
Petitioner: Exxon Mobil Corporation
Respondent: Allapattah Services, Inc., et al.

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Citation: 333 F3d 1248
Supreme Court Docket

Exxon Mobil Corporation
v.
Allapattah Services, Inc., et al.
545 U.S. 546 (2005)
Consideration Limited:

LIMITED TO QUESTION 1 PRESENTED BY THE PETITION.

Question Presented:

1. Whether the supplemental jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. ยง 1367, authorizes federal courts with diversity jurisdiction over the individual claims of named plaintiffs to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the claims of absent class members that do not satisfy the minimum amount- in-controversy requirement? 2. Whether Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes the certification of a multi-state class action where individual reliance by each class member is at issue and where the predominance of common issues can be established only by distorting the law of the applicable states?

Question:

In a civil action where one plaintiff's claim satisfies the minimum amount-in- controversy requirement for federal diversity jurisdiction, and another plaintiff's related claim does not, does 28 U.S.C. Section 1367 allow federal courts to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the claim that is less than the required amount?

Exxon Corp v. Allapattah Services
ORAL ARGUMENT

March 1, 2005

Holding: affirmed
Vote: 5-4
Opinion By:
Database Connection failed: SQLSTATE[HY000] [1045] Access denied for user 'restauz8_sophi'@'localhost' (using password: YES)