Sunday, October 14, 2012

Louisville & Nashville R.R. v. Mottley (1908) (well pleaded complaint rule)


a.       Facts- Δ is a railroad company that hurt Π. Because of this hurt, Δ agreed to give free rail passes to Π for life, so long as a suit is not brought against Δ. Π agreed. Some years later, Δ stopped giving the passes. Π brought suit in federal Ct to resolve the dispute. Δ claims that an act of Congress prohibits that giving of free passes or free transportation.
                                                              i.       
b.      Procedural History- Circuit Ct found for Π, Δ appealed, US Sup Ct remanded to lower Ct ordering lower Ct to dismiss for want of subject matter Jx
c.       Issue- Whether Π can sue in federal Ct over a breach of contract when the only relation the suit has to the Const is the Δ’s anticipated defense (Congress forbids free passes)
d.      Holding- No, Π CANNOT sue in federal Ct when the only relation to Π’s claim is the anticipated defense of the Δ
                                                              i.      Congress is the one who allegedly violated due process
e.       Rule- A federal question is one way to establish federal subject matter Jx. However, the federal question MUST be stated in the Π’s complaint…NOT in the Δ’s anticipated defense
f.       Rationale-
                                                              i.      To allege a Δ’s defense then make an answer to it before the Δ has the opportunity to itself plead or prove its own defense is inconsistent with any known rule of pleading and improper
g.      Notes-
                                                              i.      Any Federal entity is subject to Federal Jx
1.      EXCEPTION to “well pleaded complaint” rule: Even if a Federal entity is sued for strictly State laws…the complaint still must be filed in Federal court

No comments:

Post a Comment