1986•FLASH - Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship & History (Fordham University)Requires access

Pendant Party Jurisdiction and Section 1983: When has Congress "By Implication Negated" Jurisdiction?

Peter E. Schomer

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

This Note discusses how many lower federal courts, in deciding when to allow state claims to be brought in federal court under the doctrine of pendant party jurisdiction, have interpreted the Supreme Court's "Aldinger test" in a far more restrictive manner than what the Supreme Court had intended. Additionally, the Note traces the history of the doctrines of pendant jurisdiction, pendant party jurisdiction and ancillary jurisdiction. The Note also discusses of the dispute raging about the actual validity of pendant party jurisdiction, ,focusing particularly on section 1983 cases. In conclusion, the Note articulates the process and analysis a court must employ to determine if Congress has in fact negated jurisdiction.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This Note discusses how many lower federal courts, in deciding when to allow state claims to be brought in federal court under the doctrine of pendant party jurisdiction, have interpreted the Supreme Court's "Aldinger test" in a far more restrictive manner than what the Supreme Court had intended. Additionally, the Note traces the history of the doctrines of pendant jurisdiction, pendant party jurisdiction and ancillary jurisdiction. The Note also discusses of the dispute raging about the actual validity of pendant party jurisdiction, ,focusing particularly on section 1983 cases. In conclusion, the Note articulates the process and analysis a court must employ to determine if Congress has in fact negated jurisdiction.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This Note discusses how many lower federal courts, in deciding when to allow state claims to be brought in federal court under the doctrine of pendant party jurisdiction, have interpreted the Supreme Court's "Aldinger test" in a far more restrictive manner than what the Supreme Court had intended. Additionally, the Note traces the history of the doctrines of pendant jurisdiction, pendant party jurisdiction and ancillary jurisdiction. The Note also discusses of the dispute raging about the actual validity of pendant party jurisdiction, ,focusing particularly on section 1983 cases. In conclusion, the Note articulates the process and analysis a court must employ to determine if Congress has in fact negated jurisdiction.

Key concepts: Jurisdiction, Original jurisdiction, Law, Supreme court, Political science, Subject-matter jurisdiction, Federal jurisdiction, Doctrine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Pendant Party Jurisdiction and Section 1983: When has Congress "By Implication Negated" Jurisdiction? — Research Paper | ScholarLens