Aggregation of Claims: Understanding the Rules for Combining Claims in Federal Court

Question 1

In an action involving several plaintiffs, which condition must be met to aggregate their claims and satisfy the amount-in-controversy requirement for federal court jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

The total amount of all claims combined must be greater than the minimum jurisdictional amount.

Answer

Each plaintiff's claim must exceed the minimum jurisdictional amount.

Answer

The plaintiffs must be jointly responsible for each claim.

Answer

The plaintiffs must share a common interest in the legal issues underlying the lawsuit.

Question 2

What is the aim of the 'same transaction or occurrence' standard when aggregating claims?

Accepted Answer

To ensure that the claims are sufficiently interconnected.

Answer

To discourage plaintiffs from fragmenting their claims to bypass federal jurisdiction.

Answer

To place a cap on the number of claims that can be aggregated.

Answer

To encourage plaintiffs to file separate lawsuits for each claim.

Question 3

What is a potential repercussion of failing to satisfy the amount-in-controversy requirement?

Accepted Answer

The lawsuit may be dismissed due to lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

Answer

The plaintiff may face sanctions.

Answer

The case may be transferred to a state court.

Answer

The defendant may be awarded attorney's fees.

Question 4

Which of the following is NOT considered when evaluating whether claims stem from the same transaction or occurrence?

Accepted Answer

The amount of damages sought

Answer

The nature of the claims

Answer

The timing and location of the events giving rise to the claims

Answer

The parties' relationship

Question 5

What is the responsibility of the court in determining if claims satisfy the amount-in-controversy requirement?

Accepted Answer

The court can request the plaintiff to provide evidence supporting their claims.

Answer

The court must accept the plaintiff's claims about the amount-in-controversy at face value.

Answer

The court cannot consider the amount-in-controversy until the defendant responds to the complaint.

Answer

The court has no role in determining if claims satisfy the amount-in-controversy requirement.

Question 6

The 'related to' test for determining whether claims can be aggregated aims to:

Accepted Answer

Ensure that the claims are sufficiently connected to each other

Answer

Prevent plaintiffs from artificially inflating the amount in controversy

Answer

Give courts discretion to determine whether aggregation is appropriate

Answer

Provide a bright-line rule for determining aggregation

Question 7

Failing to meet the requirements for aggregating claims will most likely result in:

Accepted Answer

Dismissal of the lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction

Answer

Award of damages to the plaintiff for the defendant's failure to aggregate claims

Answer

Reduction of the amount in controversy to the amount of the largest individual claim

Answer

Permission for the plaintiff to amend the complaint to add additional claims

Question 8

The purpose of the 'single and entire cause of action' rule is to:

Accepted Answer

Prevent plaintiffs from splitting a single claim into multiple lawsuits

Answer

Allow plaintiffs to aggregate multiple claims into a single lawsuit

Answer

Give courts discretion to determine whether claims can be aggregated

Answer

Provide a bright-line rule for determining aggregation

Question 9

The Supreme Court's decision in Snyder v. Harris had the effect of:

Accepted Answer

Making it easier for plaintiffs to aggregate claims

Answer

Making it more difficult for plaintiffs to aggregate claims

Answer

Having no effect on the ability of plaintiffs to aggregate claims

Answer

Overruling the 'single and entire cause of action' rule

Question 10

When drafting a complaint that seeks to aggregate claims, it is best practice to:

Accepted Answer

Plead each claim separately and state the amount in controversy for each claim

Answer

Combine all of the claims into a single count and state the total amount in controversy

Answer

Plead each claim in the alternative and state the amount in controversy for each alternative claim

Answer

State only the total amount in controversy without specifying the amount for each individual claim

Question 11

True or False: Claim aggregation is universally permitted in class action lawsuits.

Accepted Answer

False

Answer

True

Question 12

Which of the following IS NOT a requirement for aggregating claims to establish diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

The claims must be against different defendants

Answer

The claims must arise out of a common nucleus of operative fact

Answer

The claims must be asserted by the same plaintiff

Answer

The claims must be capable of being joined in a single action

Question 13

True or False: Aggregation of claims is always permitted in federal court if the total amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional threshold.

Accepted Answer

False

Answer

True

Question 14

Which of the following is NOT a requirement for aggregating claims to meet the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

The claims must arise from unrelated occurrences.

Answer

The total amount of the claims must exceed the jurisdictional amount.

Answer

The claims must have a substantial overlap in their factual bases.

Answer

The claims must be by one or more plaintiffs against one or more defendants.

Question 15

When determining whether claims have a substantial overlap in their factual bases for purposes of aggregation, courts consider:

Accepted Answer

Whether the claims involve the same parties, same or related transactions, and legal theories.

Answer

Whether the claims occurred on the same day.

Answer

Whether the claims involve the same witnesses.

Question 16

What is the current minimum amount in controversy required for diversity jurisdiction in federal courts?

Accepted Answer

$75,000

Answer

$150,000

Answer

$50,000

Answer

$100,000

Question 17

What is the primary purpose behind the rule against aggregation of claims?

Accepted Answer

To prevent plaintiffs from forum shopping by filing multiple claims in different courts to meet the amount in controversy requirement

Answer

To ensure that defendants are not subject to excessive liability

Answer

To reduce the backlog of cases in federal courts

Question 18

The "common nucleus of operative fact" test is used to determine:

Accepted Answer

Whether claims arise from the same transaction or occurrence

Answer

Whether claims involve the same legal issues

Answer

Whether claims are filed in the same court

Question 19

Which of the following is an exception to the rule against aggregation of claims?

Accepted Answer

Aggregation of claims by co-parties

Answer

Aggregation of claims filed in different courts

Answer

Aggregation of claims involving different legal issues

Answer

Aggregation of claims by plaintiffs with unrelated claims

Question 20

What is one of the main advantages of establishing diversity jurisdiction in federal courts?

Accepted Answer

It allows plaintiffs to avoid potential bias in state courts

Answer

It guarantees a more favorable outcome for the plaintiff

Answer

It reduces the cost of litigation

Question 21

What is a potential concern associated with aggregating claims for purposes of diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

It could lead to an increase in federal court filings

Answer

It could decrease the cost of litigation

Answer

It could result in more consistent legal outcomes

Question 22

Which of the following is a requirement for aggregating claims to meet the amount in controversy requirement for federal court jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

The claims must arise from a single transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the action

Answer

The plaintiff must be a resident of the same state as the defendant

Answer

The claims must have been filed in the same court

Question 23

In Zahn v. International Paper Co., the Supreme Court held that:

Accepted Answer

Claims for unliquidated damages can be aggregated to meet the amount in controversy requirement

Answer

Claims for punitive damages cannot be aggregated

Answer

Claims for nominal damages cannot be aggregated

Question 24

A plaintiff with three claims against the same defendant, each with a value of $10,000, can aggregate the claims to meet the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction if:

Accepted Answer

The claims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence.

Answer

The claims are based on different legal theories.

Answer

The claims were filed in different courts.

Question 25

Which of the following is NOT a factor considered by courts when determining whether claims can be aggregated:

Accepted Answer

The defendant's financial resources.

Answer

Whether the claims involve similar legal issues.

Answer

The amount of time that has passed between the accrual of the claims.

Answer

Whether the claims arise out of the same transaction or occurrence.

Question 26

Which of the following is NOT a type of joinder that can be used to aggregate claims:

Accepted Answer

Cross-claim

Answer

Permissive joinder

Answer

Compulsory joinder

Question 27

In a federal court case, a plaintiff alleges breach of contract for $75,000 and fraud for $50,000. The defendant moves to dismiss the fraud claim for failing to meet the amount in controversy requirement. Can the plaintiff combine (aggregate) the claims to keep the fraud claim in the case?

Accepted Answer

Yes, as long as the claims arise out of the same nucleus of operative facts.

Answer

No, because the breach of contract claim alone meets the amount in controversy requirement.

Answer

No, because the fraud claim is below the amount in controversy requirement.

Question 28

Which of the following is NOT a method to challenge the aggregation of claims?

Accepted Answer

Motion for summary judgment

Answer

Motion to strike

Answer

Motion to dismiss

Question 29

A plaintiff alleges breach of contract for $75,000 and negligence for $25,000. The defendant moves to sever the negligence claim because it is unrelated to the breach of contract claim. Should the court grant the motion?

Accepted Answer

No, as long as the claims arise out of the same nucleus of operative facts.

Answer

Yes, because the negligence claim is below the amount in controversy requirement.

Answer

Yes, because the defendant has the right to have the claims tried separately.

Question 30

In a diversity jurisdiction case, to meet the amount in controversy requirement, the aggregate value of claims by a single plaintiff against a single defendant must exceed the jurisdictional threshold.

Accepted Answer

True

Answer

False

Answer

Only if the claims arise from the same transaction or event

Answer

Only if the claims are formally consolidated

Question 31

When determining whether to aggregate claims for jurisdictional purposes, courts do NOT consider:

Accepted Answer

The running of the statute of limitations for each claim

Answer

The interests of judicial economy

Answer

The common nucleus of facts underlying the claims

Question 32

The Supreme Court's ruling in Zahn v. International Paper Co. (1973) restricted the aggregation of claims in diversity jurisdiction cases.

Accepted Answer

True

Answer

False

Answer

Only for personal injury claims

Question 33

An exception to the rule against aggregating claims against multiple defendants in diversity jurisdiction cases exists for:

Accepted Answer

Mass tort cases

Answer

Property damage cases

Answer

Personal injury cases

Answer

Breach of contract cases

Question 34

Strategic use of aggregation in diversity jurisdiction cases can be employed to:

Accepted Answer

Access federal court

Answer

Delay case resolution

Answer

Increase the likelihood of winning

Answer

Avoid state court fees

Question 35

The primary purpose of the "independent and supplemental" jurisdiction doctrines in relation to aggregation of claims is to:

Accepted Answer

Allow courts to exercise jurisdiction over related claims that do not meet the amount-in-controversy requirement

Answer

Prevent plaintiffs from splitting their claims to avoid federal jurisdiction

Question 36

If a court finds that claims cannot be aggregated, the likely consequence is:

Accepted Answer

Dismissal of the claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction

Answer

Consolidation of the claims into a single lawsuit

Answer

Transfer of the claims to a state court

Question 37

An example of claims that may be aggregated to meet the amount-in-controversy requirement includes:

Accepted Answer

A claim for breach of contract in the amount of $50,000 and a tort claim in the amount of $25,000

Answer

A claim for patent infringement and a claim for copyright infringement

Answer

A claim for assault and a claim for slander

Question 38

In the context of aggregation of claims, "mandatory" aggregation differs from "permissive" aggregation in that:

Accepted Answer

Mandatory aggregation requires the joinder of all related claims, while permissive aggregation allows plaintiffs to choose whether to aggregate

Answer

Permissive aggregation applies to claims that arise from the same transaction or occurrence, while mandatory aggregation applies to unrelated claims

Question 39

A defendant can challenge the aggregation of claims by:

Accepted Answer

Filing a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction

Answer

Filing a motion for summary judgment

Answer

Filing a motion to consolidate

Question 40

In a diversity action, which of the following is NOT a permissible method for combining claims to meet the amount in controversy requirement?

Accepted Answer

Combining claims by a husband and wife who live in the same household

Answer

Combining claims by a single plaintiff who suffered multiple injuries in the same accident

Answer

Combining claims by multiple plaintiffs with separate and distinct injuries arising from the same incident or transaction

Question 41

In a diversity action, what is the purpose of the "separate and independent claims" exception to the rule against aggregation?

Accepted Answer

To allow plaintiffs to aggregate claims that are not closely related

Answer

To allow plaintiffs to aggregate claims that are based on the same set of facts

Answer

To allow plaintiffs to aggregate claims that are filed against the same defendant

Question 42

In a diversity action, what is the rationale behind the rule against aggregation of claims?

Accepted Answer

To prevent plaintiffs from artificially inflating the amount in controversy to gain access to federal court

Answer

To ensure that federal courts are not overburdened with frivolous lawsuits

Answer

To simplify the litigation process

Question 43

In a diversity action, what is the purpose of the "single plaintiff" exception to the rule against aggregation?

Accepted Answer

To allow a single plaintiff to aggregate claims that arise from a single incident or transaction

Answer

To allow a single plaintiff to aggregate claims that are based on different legal theories

Answer

To allow a single plaintiff to aggregate claims that are unrelated

Question 44

A plaintiff sues a defendant in federal court, alleging breach of contract for $75,000. The defendant counterclaims for $50,000.  Can the plaintiff's claim and the defendant's counterclaim be aggregated to meet the amount in controversy requirement?

Accepted Answer

Yes, the claims can be aggregated because they are related to the same transaction or occurrence.

Answer

No, counterclaims are never considered for purposes of aggregation.

Answer

No, the claims cannot be aggregated because they are brought by different parties.

Question 45

A plaintiff sues a defendant in federal court, alleging breach of contract for $75,000. The defendant files a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, arguing that the plaintiff's claim is actually for only $50,000.  Which of the following statements is true?

Accepted Answer

The plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional minimum.

Answer

The defendant bears the burden of proving that the amount in controversy does not exceed the jurisdictional minimum.

Question 46

A plaintiff sues a defendant in federal court, seeking injunctive relief to prevent the defendant from violating a trademark.  The plaintiff's claim is valued at $100,000, but the defendant argues that the amount in controversy is less than the jurisdictional minimum.  Which of the following is true regarding the determination of the amount in controversy in this case?

Accepted Answer

The amount in controversy may be determined by the value of the right being protected, even if the plaintiff is not seeking monetary damages.

Answer

The amount in controversy must be based solely on the value of the monetary damages sought by the plaintiff.

Question 47

A plaintiff sues a defendant in federal court, alleging breach of contract for $75,000. The plaintiff also seeks declaratory judgment that the contract is void.  Can the claim for declaratory judgment be aggregated with the breach of contract claim for purposes of meeting the amount in controversy requirement?

Accepted Answer

Yes, if the declaratory judgment claim is inextricably intertwined with the breach of contract claim and the value of the declaratory judgment claim exceeds the jurisdictional minimum.

Answer

No, claims for declaratory judgment can never be aggregated with other claims.

Question 48

A plaintiff sues a defendant in federal court, alleging breach of contract for $50,000. The plaintiff also seeks punitive damages for the defendant's malicious conduct.  Can the claim for punitive damages be aggregated with the breach of contract claim for purposes of meeting the amount in controversy requirement?

Accepted Answer

Yes, but only if the claim for punitive damages is based on the same transaction or occurrence as the breach of contract claim.

Answer

No, claims for punitive damages can never be aggregated with other claims.

Question 49

A plaintiff sues a defendant for $50,000 in a state court for breach of contract. The defendant is a resident of a different state. Can the plaintiff remove the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

No, the amount in controversy does not meet the jurisdictional threshold.

Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can remove the case to federal court because there is complete diversity of citizenship.

Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can remove the case to federal court because the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.

Question 50

A plaintiff sues a defendant for $70,000 in a state court for breach of contract. The plaintiff also has a separate claim against the defendant for $30,000 for negligence. Can the plaintiff aggregate these claims to meet the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can aggregate the claims because they arise from the same transaction or occurrence.

Answer

No, the plaintiff cannot aggregate the claims because they are unrelated.

Question 51

A plaintiff sues a defendant for $40,000 in a state court for breach of contract. The plaintiff also has a separate claim against the defendant for $40,000 for defamation. Can the plaintiff aggregate these claims to meet the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

No, the plaintiff cannot aggregate these claims because they are unrelated.

Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can aggregate the claims because they are against the same defendant.

Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can aggregate the claims because they both involve monetary damages.

Question 52

A plaintiff sues a defendant for $20,000 in a state court for breach of contract. The plaintiff also has a separate claim against the same defendant for $60,000 in a different state court for negligence. Can the plaintiff aggregate these claims to meet the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

No, the plaintiff cannot aggregate the claims because they are pending in different courts.

Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can aggregate the claims because they are against the same defendant.

Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can aggregate the claims because they both involve monetary damages.

Question 53

A plaintiff sues three defendants for $20,000 each in a state court for breach of contract. Can the plaintiff aggregate these claims to meet the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can aggregate the claims because they are against multiple defendants arising from the same transaction or occurrence.

Answer

No, the plaintiff cannot aggregate the claims because they are against multiple defendants.

Question 54

A plaintiff sues a defendant for $75,000 in a state court for breach of contract. The defendant is a resident of the same state as the plaintiff. Can the plaintiff remove the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

No, there is no diversity jurisdiction because the plaintiff and defendant are residents of the same state.

Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can remove the case to federal court because the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.

Question 55

A plaintiff sues a defendant for $80,000 in a state court for breach of contract. The defendant is a resident of a different state. The plaintiff is a citizen of the United States and a resident of a different state. Can the plaintiff remove the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

No, the plaintiff cannot remove the case because they are not a citizen of a different state from the defendant.

Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can remove the case because the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.

Question 56

A plaintiff sues a defendant for $90,000 in a state court for breach of contract. The defendant is a corporation incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of business in New York. The plaintiff is a resident of California. Can the plaintiff remove the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

Yes, there is diversity jurisdiction because the plaintiff and the defendant are citizens of different states.

Answer

No, there is no diversity jurisdiction because the defendant is a corporation.

Question 57

A plaintiff sues a defendant for $50,000 in a state court for breach of contract. The defendant is a resident of a different state. The plaintiff is a resident of the same state as the defendant but is also a citizen of a different country. Can the plaintiff remove the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

Yes, there is diversity jurisdiction because the plaintiff and the defendant are citizens of different states.

Answer

No, there is no diversity jurisdiction because the plaintiff is a resident of the same state as the defendant.

Question 58

A plaintiff sues a defendant for $100,000 in a state court for breach of contract. The defendant is a resident of a different state. The plaintiff is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the same state as the defendant. The plaintiff also has a separate claim against the defendant for $20,000 for negligence, which is pending in a federal court. Can the plaintiff aggregate these claims to meet the amount in controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction?

Accepted Answer

No, the plaintiff cannot aggregate the claims because they are pending in different courts.

Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can aggregate the claims because they are against the same defendant.

Answer

Yes, the plaintiff can aggregate the claims because they are both related to the same defendant.