#T3BE 280 - Full Question Text for Patrons

I'm with Thomas and the bees on this one - the answer is a fish. It seems like a too-good-to-be true answer but it makes more sense if you think about it. Damages demanded in complaints are like a sticker price and usually start out much higher than is ever actually awarded or settled. $75k might be a lot of money to us, but not to a federal judge. They'd swat it away. Continuing down the list: A - Service was arguably improper but the Defendant waived her personal jurisdiction challenge when she filed an Answer before moving to dismiss. C - Doesn't make sense because it relates to whether a state court (not federal court) has jurisdiction over a defendant - and either way, Defendant waived that argument by answering instead of removing or moving to dismiss first. D - Diversity jurisdiction does not require the incident to have occurred in the state in which the district court is located. D might be true if this had been filed in State A's state court.

John Brown did nothing wrong

Just finished my Civil Procedure class in the Spring, so hopefully I can get this one! I say D. Service seems proper as the plaintiff knew that the defendant visited her parents and it's reasonable that her parents would forward the served papers to her. B is technically a correct choice (must be GREATER than $75k if subject matter jurisdiction is determined via diversity jurisdiction), but it's not the best choice. C refers to general jurisdiction for corporations and is irrelevant to private individuals. D is correct here for a lack of specific jurisdiction. When determining jurisdiction, you care about the defendant, not the plaintiff. Since the defendant lives in State B and the accident occurred in State B, suing in State A is improper and motion gets dismissed under 12(b)(2).