Case BriefCiv Pro Unit B1: diversity jurisdiction1/17/15Identity of CaseMas v. Perry, 489 F.2d 1396 (5th Cir. 1974)Page 51 of the casebookSummary of Facts/ Procedural HistoryMr. M is a French citizen married to Mrs. M, a United States citizen. Prior to their marriage, they lived together as graduate students in Louisiana. They returned to Mrs. M’s home in Mississippi for their marriage, and then returned to Louisiana for two years (during which time they rented an apartment from the defendant) and then moved to Illinois, where they were living when they filed the suit. The suit alleged that Perry had been watching them through a 2-way mirror in their apartment, causing damages in excess of 10,000. (they asked for much much more but that is the minimum in 1974 for federal jurisdiction to be allowed). Judgment against Perry for a total of 5000 to Mr. Mas and 15,000 to Mrs. Mas. Perry appeals on lack of jurisdiction for lack of diversity jurisdiction on both parties and failureto meet the minimum sum for Mr. Mas. Statement of the IssueDo the Mas’s have diverse citizenship from Mr. Perry? Does the fact that Mr. Mas’ claim was adjudicated to be less than the minimum mean that jurisdiction was lacking? HoldingMrs. Mas is domiciled in Mississippi, as she has not abandoned that domicile and has intent of returning and considers their student domicile temporary. Mr. Mas is a foreign citizen, and therefore is entitled to diversity jurisdiction (until later, when the law changes to put permitted permanent residents in the same category as citizens for the basis of diversity jurisdiction). It is the amount in dispute at the claim that determines whether the minimum was met, not the adjudication. Frivolous argument. ReasoningThat’s the damn rule, ya moron.
View Full Document
Unlocking...