To clarify, there are other ways to get into federal court, but those are two the most common.
Also, federal questions cover all kinds of things from intellectual property law to environmental law, civil rights, etc.
State law usually governs things like contracts, torts, and property disputes. These types of actions are usually brought in state court unless there is diversity jurisdiction (see post above).
There are basically two ways. One is when a suit involves “federal question jurisdiction”, meaning the case is one that “aris[es] under [the] Constitution, or the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made…under their authority.” This is when Congress passed the law that you are suing under, or you are suing because your constitutional rights are being violated, or the U.S. is the plaintiff, or there is some other significant federal interest in hearing your case.
The other is called “diversity jurisdiction.” This is a state law civil case that is heard in federal court. However, there must be a few additional factors met that aren’t necessary in state court, and you guessed them. One is that the parties must be “diverse,” meaning all the plaintiffs must be from a different state from all the defendants. If any plaintiff is from the same state as any defendant it wrecks diversity, and must go to state court to be heard. The other requirement is the amount in controversy must be over $75,000. There are a few exceptions to these jurisdictional requirements, but this is the basic story in the majority of cases.
Of course, on preview Bearflag said in two sentences what takes me twenty. If the people are from different states and the amount is under $75,000 in a state law case, it goes to state court. The original idea was to make the federal courts available in some civil cases so people from out of state would get a “fair shake” that the state courts may not give them.
I don’t know if a jury is required for a trademark action without researching it. When I was looking at your OP, basically the court will look to see if a right to a jury is provided by a federal staute. If not, then the court will look to the 7th Amendment. Under the 7th Amendment analysis, the court will look to see whether a trademark action would be a "Suit at common law " in 1789, when the Constitution was ratified.
To answer the speciic trademark question: I don’t know. However, since this trademark action presents a federal question under federal law, you need to worry about the amount of the dispute. The court will hear the case.
If you are NOT suing under FEDERAL law, but you want to sue under STATE law (e.g., a contract dispute or tort), then you must be from different states AND your claim must exceed $75,000.
If it is under $75,000, then the plaintiff must sue in a state court. Which state? Well, that ‘s another can o’ worms.
I mean since it is a federal question, you DO NOT need to worry about the amount in controversy. The federal court will hear all federal question cases regardless of the amount.
Trademark disputes are indeed entitled to jury trial, bearflag. The “equity” cases are apparently pretty rare.
I’m curious about federal civil cases beyond the two main categories explained by bearflag and pravnik.
I assume DC has their own civil courts?
What happens if I am defamed by someone at the local branch of the Federal Reserve, or the Post Office, or on a military base? Does local(state) civil law apply, or does the fact of it being federal property change the jurisdiction? And what if it’s on a US-flagged cargo ship in the Indian Ocean?
Any other clear-cut, if uncommon, occasions of federal jurisdiction in civil cases?
dqa
You got me on that one. You might start a new thread to get other opinions on that specific question since it deviates so much from the OP.
I gotta run, but when I was thinking of other ways to get into federal court, I was thinking of the matters of original jurisdiction of the US Supreme Court
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=164953
I started a thread on the hypothetical jurisdiction questions.
Perhaps. However, there are many cases brought to the District Court after a claimant has exhausted his administrative remedies through a federal agency, such as Tax Court, the Appeals Council (in Social Security cases and other administrative agencies such as labor actions), etc. Since the defendant is an agency of the US, District Court is the venue.
I think the confusion comes from the “would you like to press charges?” crap you always see on TV and in the movies. It is somewhat implied that the answer to that question is the final determinant of whether the state will prosecute. Yes, sometimes for small/trivial things prosecutorial discretion will seek the input of the victim, but by no means is the government bound by the victim’s desires.
A small correction – the $20 amount mentioned in the Seventh Amendment is not related to the $75,000+ amount in controversy requirement. The $20 threshold still stands – if you’re the defendant at an action at law in federal court, you’re entitled to a jury if $20 or more is at stake. However, unless there is a federal question, you’re not going to be in federal court at all unless there’s more than 75 grand at stake, so the $20 limit is moot.
–Cliffy, Esq.
Incorrect. Since trademark is a federal question, you can get in to federal court regardless of the amount. A $1,000 trademark dispute can get into federal court, as can a $1,000 pollution suit or a $1,000 employment discrimination suit, but a $74,872 contract dispute cannot. As long as the trademark dispute is “at law” and not equity (the distinction is very confused and generally irrelevant for the purposes of this thread), then a jury is required if there’s there’s more than twenty bucks at stake.
As others have answered, it’ll be a state court. Note that state courts are also available for suits where much more than 75 grand is at stake; it’s up to the plaintiff to decide if he wants to bring a case at the state or federal level (although at a later stage the defendant can sometimes “remove” a state case to federal court).
–Cliffy
First, to jklann, if memory serves me correct, I believe one of the user agreements was to “NOT BE A JERK”. You need a hug. Before you call someone’s intelligence appalling, you should become a bit more informed of the actual conversation! Were your there? I doubt it.
To the others, I am impressed with many of the intelligence comments.
To the person, asking the question question: You placed one section in bold print, thus placing some type of emphasis? However, the conversation does not focus on this area. Was the teacher attempting to focus you on this area? Did you ask this question while he was going over the material… before the test?
Also, if his desk is messy enough to bother you, why don’t you ask if you could clean it up?
That would be a sub-set of federal question jurisdiction.
Unless I’m missing something, there are only three types of claims that are cognizable in federal court, only two of which will qualify for federal court jurisdiction on their own:
Diversity – Pl. and D. must be from different states or countries and the amount in controversy must be greater than $75,000.
Federal question – the claims turn on an issue of federal law and, as a general rule, there must be a separate right to jurisdiction granted in a federal statute, administrative regulation, or in the Constitution. There is no amount in controversy requirement for these claims. Note that the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over some federal questions, but many federal questions can be heard in state courts at the option of the plaintiff.
Pendent jurisdiction – a state law claim that doesn’t qualify on diversity grounds, but which is part of the same lawsuit as other claims (typically fed. questions) which do qualify. For instance, a citizen of State X might sue a State X corporation under both the Clean Air Act and the State X air pollution law. Since there’s no diversity, the Pl. couldn’t bring the state law claim in federal court, but since the CAA claim would be there anyway, the federal courts would typically be willing to adjudicate the state law claim as part of the same suit.
–Cliffy
Welcome to the SDMB, flash. I commend you on the fact that you read the user agreement – many do not. However, I do take issue with your criticism; the person being discussed is a teacher who is not only delivering incorrect “facts” to his charges, he appears to ignore efforts made to correct his errors. The simple fact is that such ignorance is appaling. While teachers cannot always be expected to be correct, they must always be willing to investigate possible errors – and this is a pretty gross one. General Questions is hoped to be the greatest, most reliable respository of factual information on the web; the one prejudice you must forgive us is that against not the stupid or foolish, but against the willfully uninformed.
–Cliffy
flash: The teacher was attempting to focus my attention at that area. However, this bolding does not affect the fact that an impartial trial by jury in a civil suit is not guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment.
The messiness of his desk actually does not bother me. I mentioned the messiness because it would serve as cover for an item which did not belong.
Today I asked him about the difference between a homicide case and a wrongful death suit. He amazingly got it right. However, when I linked it to the 6th/7th amendment issue, he denied it’s bearing. I told him about U.S. vs Zucker. I then mentioned how you all agreed that he was wrong. He called y’all a bunch of idiots. He didn’t ask to read the thread. I didn’t offer-- I was late for next period anyway.
I’m having trouble with this issue… or issues with this trouble… I find it hard to understand how someone in such a position of power can by so not-trustworthy-with-facts…
Ahh, grasshopper, the road to wisdom lies before you… 
It depends upon what the law or regulation states. Medicare cases, for example, under regulations promulgated by HCFA, require an amount in controversy of at least $100, IIRC.
True – I should have said there is no generally appliacable amount in controversy requirement in federal question cases as there is in diversity cases, but that the federal statute (or whatever) which creates the right to bring a given suit in federal court may have its own amount which applies only to claims of that type.
–Cliffy
We may be a bunch of idiots, but we’re mostly a bunch of idiots who went to or are going to law school. Myself included, I count at least seven lawyers in this thread (most of whom never agree on anything), that agree that based on what you’ve told us your instructor’s question is either very poorly written or mistaken about the law.