The Erection of a Barrier Against Assertion of Ancillary Claims: An Examination of Owen Equipment and Erection Company V. Koger
Michael A. Berch
Arizona State University (ASU) - Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law
Arizona State Law Journal, p. 253, 1979
In Owen Equipment and Erection Company v. Kroger, 98 S. Ct. 2396 (1978), the Supreme Court announced the ambit of ancillary jurisdiction in the context of third-party practice. In what may be fairly characterized a bizarre factual situation giving the Court ample opportunity to avoid the rule it eventually exposits, the Court holds that a plaintiff, in a case predicated upon diversity of citizenship, must have independent grounds of jurisdiction for the assertion of transactionally related claims against a third-party defendant. This article examines the Owen decision and its impact. Raising the shibboleth of the limited jurisdiction of the federal courts and ascertaining a congressional intent in the general diversity statute against the assertion of such claims absent independent jurisdictional grounds, the Court retreats from the sound pragmatic considerations of United Mine Workers v. Gibbs, reads Aldinger v. Howard and Zahn v. International Paper Co. for more than they are worth, and creates an enclave of issues which federal courts may be impotent to adjudicate.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 10
Keywords: ancillary jurisdiction, diversity, civil procedure
Date posted: May 29, 2009
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.172 seconds