Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
PUBLISH
AUG 11 2000
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
Defendants-Appellees.
Carolyn L. McIntosh and George R. Coe, Patton Boggs, L.L.P., Denver, Colorado,
for Defendants-Appellees.
Before TACHA, McKAY, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
McKAY, Circuit Judge.
-3-
address that question first. Article III of the United States Constitution gives
Congress the power to vest jurisdiction in the federal courts over controversies
between citizens of different states. Congress first authorized the exercise of
diversity jurisdiction in the Judiciary Act of 1789. In its current form, the
diversity statute provides that [t]he district courts shall have original jurisdiction
of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of
$75,000, . . . and is between . . . citizens of different States. 28 U.S.C.
1332(a)(1). Since its enactment, the courts have consistently interpreted it to
require complete diversity, i.e., [a] case falls within the federal district courts
original diversity jurisdiction . . . only if there is no plaintiff and no defendant
who are citizens of the same State. Wisconsin Dept of Corrections v. Schacht,
524 U.S. 381, 388 (1998); see Carden v. Arkoma Assocs., 494 U.S. 185, 187
(1990); Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 267 (1806). But cf. Fed. R.
Civ. P. 21; Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U.S. 826, 832, 837
(1989) (holding that Rule 21 gives appellate, as well as district courts, authority
to dismiss nondiverse parties in order to cure jurisdictional defects).
For diversity purposes, a corporation is deemed to be a citizen of any State
by which it has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place
of business. 28 U.S.C. 1332(c)(1). When determining a corporations
principal place of business, a court should look to the total activity of the
-5-
-7-