2. Consider the following cases, all of which are actions brought in
federal court under state law with an amount in controversy greater
$75,000. Is there diversity (or alienage) jurisdiction under 1332?
a. A Californian sues a New Yorker and a Californian.
b. A Californian sues a German.
c. A German sues a Belgian.
d. A Californian sues Germany.
e. A Frenchman
sues a Texan and a Californian.
i. Germany sues a Californian.
j. A Californian sues a French citizen domiciled in California who has not been admitted for permanent residence.
k. A Californian sues an American citizen domiciled in France.
3. Why does diversity jurisdiction exist? Is the diversity statute correctly drafted to serve these purposes? Would you redraft it? How? In connection with these questions consider the following scenarios:
4. In Baker v. Keck, what was the citizenship of the Progressive Mine Workers of America?
5. Why not look to the citizenship at the time of the events being adjudicated rather than the citizenship at the time of the commencement of the suit in order to determine diversity?
6. Does the decision in Baker v. Keck make sense given the
purposes of diversity jurisdiction?