Circuit split · federal jurisdiction
Whether the amount in controversy for federal jurisdiction may be measured from the viewpoint of either party (the 'either viewpoint rule') or only from the plaintiff's viewpoint
1 federal appellate case on this question, each acknowledging the disagreement in its own words.
- Everett v. Verizon Wireless, Inc.460 F3D 818
Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals · August 28, 2006
“As we recently observed, the question poses a “jurisdictional morass” because “there is a circuit split as to whether a court may determine the amount in controversy from the perspective of either party (the ‘either viewpoint rule’) or whether a court may only consider the plaintiffs viewpoint.” — Acknowledges a circuit split
Empirical analysis of this case →
The other side of the split
Decisions the acknowledging court(s) named as the opposing or joined side, quoted in the acknowledging opinion's own words.
- Declined to follow · 6th Cir.Olden v. Lafarge Corp.383 F.3d 495
What the split turns on
- Anchor precedents:
- Hunt v. Wash. State Apple Adver. Comm'n432 U.S. 333 ·
- McNutt v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp.298 U.S. 178
- Doctrines & tests:
- either viewpoint rule
Cases are grouped by the legal question they announce a split on, classified from the court's own acknowledgment sentence. Verified acknowledgments only. Counter-side decisions are extracted from the acknowledging opinions' own text and linked only when the citation resolves in this corpus. See all circuit splits.