Pendent jurisdiction

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pendent jurisdiction is the authority of a United States federal court to hear a closely related state law claim against a party already facing a federal claim, described by Justice Antonin Scalia as "jurisdiction over nonfederal claims between parties litigating other matters properly before the court."^[1] Such jurisdiction is granted to encourage both "economy in litigation,"^[2] and fairness by eliminating the need for a separate federal and state trial hearing essentially the same facts yet potentially reaching opposite conclusions.

Pendent jurisdiction refers to the court's authority to adjudicate claims it could not otherwise hear. The related concept of pendent party jurisdiction by contrast is the court's authority to adjudicate claims against a party not otherwise under the court's jurisdiction because the claim arises from the same nucleus of facts as another claim properly before the court.

The leading case on pendent jurisdiction is United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715 (1966). Gibbs has been read to require that (1) there must be a federal claim (whether from the Constitution, federal statute, or treaty) and (2) the non-federal claim arises "from a common nucleus of operative fact" such that a plaintiff "would ordinarily be expected to try them in one judicial proceeding."

The holding in Gibbs has been essentially codified by Congress along with ancillary jurisdiction in 28 U.S.C. § 1367, its supplemental jurisdiction statute. However, Subsection § 1367 (c)(3) "expressly authorizes the district judge to dismiss a supplemental claim when the federal claims have dropped out of the case."^[3]

[edit] References

1. ^ Finley v. United States, 490 U.S. 545 (1989).
2. ^ Williams Elecs. Games, Inc. v. Garrity, No. 05-4006 (7th Cir. 2007).
3. ^ Ibid.