If the case is filed in Nevada, it can stay in district court. However, under the circumstances you have stated with respect to the parties' residences, the defense could remove the case to federal court based on complete diversity and an amount in controversy that exceeds $75,000. Your father should speak with his attorney. If you or he have any questions, feel free to call or email me
If you would like a free consultation, call me at 702-823-3333. www.naimidilbeck.com
In a state court there must be something called minimum contacts which is a multilayered analysi involving both the state statute and the constitutionality of forcing an out of state party into the local court. No facts in this post indicate that you have local state court jurisdiciton but you need a civil litigattion attorney to look into it.
Federal courts present many unique jurisdictional issues. As a thumbnail, U.S. District Courts have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between either citizens of different States or citizens of a State and citizens or subjects of a foreign state. But, this is a complex analysis no one here can give you the bottom line without many more details.
Click The Blue Link Below For More:
Law Offices of Andrew D. Myers, North Andover, MA & Derry, NH provide answers for informational purposes only. Actual legal advice can only be given by an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction, thoroughly familiar with the area of the law in which your concern lies. This creates no attorney-client relationship.
Mr. Myers' answer seems to respond most directly to your question. In my experience, Federal Court here in Nevada can be really great for a quick resolution of a case. It's certainly more intimidating, but it makes for organized and efficient discovery and the Federal Court Judges constantly push for a fair settlement to avoid actual trial.
I would love to talk to you about this case if you have a moment.
From what you write it appears that any party in your father's case can remove to federal court. A traditional reasons that many plaintiff attorneys do not file in federal court when they have the opportunity to do so because of diversity or a federal issue is jury verdicts in federal court have to be unanimous thereby arguably making it more difficult to get a plaintiff's verdict in federal court. Some plaintiff's attorneys also feel that state court judges may give them more freedom in asking prospective jurors questions in the process called voire dire. That said, federal court is less crowded and in many ways a more pleasant place to be.
Five basic considerations govern the proper removal of a case from state to federal
court: Who, What, Where, When, and How. “Who” determines which party may remove a
case to federal court, and “what” dictates which sorts of cases may be removed. “Where”
governs the place to which the case may be removed, while “when” governs the timing of that
removal. Finally, “how” regulates the method by which a case may be removed. Each of
these considerations is addressed below. Before expounding upon them, however, two basic
tenets of removal jurisdiction must be recognized: first, removal statutes are strictly
construed, and all doubts regarding removability are resolved in favor of remand to state
court. Second, the burden of establishing removal jurisdiction rests with the defendant, and
this burden applies both to establishing federal jurisdiction and to following appropriate
Statutory diversity jurisdiction exists over controversies between citizens of different
states, and between a state or its citizen and a foreign state or its citizens, provided the amount
in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. 28 U.S.C. § 1332. For
diversity jurisdiction to exist, diversity must be complete. That is, all plaintiffs must be
diverse in citizenship from all defendants, and no plaintiff may have the same citizenship as
any of the defendants. if there are any Nevada defendents diversity is defeted.
The materials available at this web site are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Web site or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Howard Roitman, Esq. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney.