I have not discussed Federal court diversity jurisdiction in a long time. Yet, the issue is important for attorneys handling significant injury claims.


Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. Generally, Federal courts have jurisdiction of claims under the U.S. Constitution, treaties and Federal statutes.

Last week, a Federal Court jury in Florida found Boston Scientific liable for the severe personal injuries caused by one of its transvaginal mesh products. The Florida case involved four women suffering tremendous problems from implanted mesh. The jury assessed $26.7 Million in damages against the company. This was not the first trial loss

Last November, I addressed the struggles of our Federal Courts to determine corporate citizenship for purposes of diversity jurisdiction.  My previous entry details the issues surrounding diversity jurisdiction as well as the various tests utilized by Federal Courts to determine corporate citizenship.  At that time, the U.S. Supreme Court had just heard oral argument in

This week the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Hertz Corporation v. Friend. The case presents a significant issue of conflict between the various Federal Circuits. At issue — Where is a corporation’s principal place of business for purposes of establishing diversity jurisdiction in Federal Court.

For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, corporations are considered