Case Brief Civ Pro Unit B federal question jurisdiction 1 17 15 Identity of Case Lousiville Nashville Railroad Co v Mottley 211 U S 149 1908 Page 92 of the casebook Summary of Facts Procedural History Plaintiff Mottleys had lifetime free rides from the railroad renewable every year as part of a valid contract to settle their claims against the railroad for some personal injury or other Congress passed a bill forbidding free rides Defendants declined to renew the passes Mottley s brought suit to enforce the contract in federal court because they believed they had a federal question RR said no federal question TC judgment in Mottley s favor appealed all the way up to SCOTUS who declined to decide whether the law excused performance of the contract because the federal court did not have jurisdiction no diversity citizenship no federal question Statement of the Issue Is citing federal issues as anticipated defenses to your claim sufficient to eget your trial into federal court under federal question jurisdiction Holding In order to qualify under federal question jurisdiction a claim must arise under federal or constitutional law Reasoning This means that the violations alleged in the complain infringe on rights guaranteed by the federal gov t Contract law is state law fEderal gov t based defenses are insufficient to move it inuto federal court Evaluation Mottley s resued in state court eventually it was appealed back up to SCOTUS
View Full Document
Unlocking...