Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
28 U.S.C.S. § 1332 requires that the matter in controversy exceed $ 75,000, and that the action be between citizens of different states.
The attorney represented the client in a lawsuit. After the attorney was allowed to withdraw from his representation of the client, he sought recovery of attorney's fees. The district court permitted the attorney's intervention under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24 and awarded $16,068.00 in attorney's fees to the attorney. The former client challenged the decision.
Did the district court have supplemental jurisdiction over the attorney’s claim in intervention against the client?
The court held that, prior to being allowed to intervene, the jurisdictional requirements of 28 U.S.C.S. § 1332 were fulfilled because there was complete diversity of citizenship and the amount in controversy exceeded $ 75,000. The attorney, however, was not completely diverse from defendants in the underlying action and the attorney's claim for attorney's fees fell below $75,000. The court held that the lack of complete diversity and the presence of an amount in controversy less than $ 75,000 were both inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of § 1332, and that the district court lacked supplemental jurisdiction over the attorney's claim under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1367(b) because it was a claim by a person seeking to intervene as a plaintiff under Rule 24. The court also held that the attorney was properly aligned as a plaintiff, not as a defendant, because of the nature of his claim.