LIMITING JURISDICTION OF FEDERAL COURTS-PENDING BILLSCOMMENT BY MEMBERS OF CHICAGO UNIVERSITY LAW FACULTY

Authors

Abstract

At the time the last session of Congress adjourned four important bills affecting the jurisdiction of federal district courts were being considered. The Norris-La Guardia bill would abolish the jurisdiction of federal district courts in suits of a civil nature "between citizens of different states." The Attorney General's bill would not eliminate any of the language of the first paragraph of section 24 of the Judicial Code but would add a provision that a foreign corporation carrying on business in a state other than the one wherein it was organized shall be treated as a citizen of the state wherein it carries on business "as respects suits brought within that state between itself and residents thereof and arising out of the business carried on in such state." Such a corporation is to be so treated for the purpose of jurisdiction in a district court. The Johnson bill likewise does not eliminate any of the first paragraph of section 24 but adds thereto a provision that no district court shall have jurisdiction to enjoin the enforcement of any order of an administrative board or commission of a state where jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship or on alleged invalidity because of the federal Constitution. This restriction is limited to orders which affect rates, and which do not interfere with interstate commerce, and which have been made after reasonable notice and hearing, and where a remedy may be had by a complainant in the courts of the state. The Bulwinkle bill merely increases the required sum that must be in controversy from $3,000 to $7,500.

Recommended Citation

LIMITING JURISDICTION OF FEDERAL COURTS-PENDING BILLSCOMMENT BY MEMBERS OF CHICAGO UNIVERSITY LAW FACULTY, 31 Mich. L. Rev. 59 (1932).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol31/iss1/6