Civil Procedure Multistate Bar Practice Exam

In diversity cases, when can a plaintiff invoke supplemental jurisdiction?

1. When they have multiple defendants

2. When a claim meets the amount in controversy requirement

3. When there are multiple plaintiffs with varying claims

4. When the case is filed in federal court

The correct answer is: When there are multiple plaintiffs with varying claims

In diversity cases, a plaintiff can invoke supplemental jurisdiction primarily to allow related claims that would not independently satisfy the federal diversity jurisdiction requirements to be heard in federal court. Supplemental jurisdiction is designed to promote judicial efficiency by allowing courts to hear claims that are linked to the main claim, assuming the additional claims share a common nucleus of operative fact with the original claim. In the context of having multiple plaintiffs with varying claims, supplemental jurisdiction allows a federal court to hear state law claims brought by additional plaintiffs against the same defendant if those claims are related to the original claim (which is within federal jurisdiction). This is particularly relevant in scenarios where co-plaintiffs have claims that are related, even if their individual claims do not meet the threshold for the amount in controversy or diversity alone. Thus, having multiple plaintiffs and their related claims can give rise to the invocation of supplemental jurisdiction in a diversity case. While the other options refer to scenarios that may involve multiple parties or claims, they do not directly connect to the specific conditions under which supplemental jurisdiction is applicable. For instance, simply having multiple defendants or filing a case in federal court does not inherently trigger supplemental jurisdiction. The key aspect is the relationship between the claims and their common connection to the principal claim that qualifies for federal jurisdiction.