Legal Terminology, Court Structure, and Jurisdiction
Legal Terminology, Court Structure, and Jurisdiction
This domain tests vocabulary precision and the structural map of the court system: which court hears a case, which court reviews it, and which doctrines and deadlines decide whether a court may act at all.
Court structure
State systems generally run limited-jurisdiction courts (small claims, probate, family, justice of the peace), general-jurisdiction trial courts, an intermediate appellate court, and a court of last resort. Federal trial courts are the 94 district courts; appeals go to one of the 13 circuits (First through Eleventh, the D.C. Circuit, and the Federal Circuit, which hears patent, trademark, and certain government contract appeals); Supreme Court review is discretionary by writ of certiorari under Rule 10. Bankruptcy courts are Article I units of the district court, as are the Tax Court and Court of Federal Claims.
Jurisdiction
Subject-matter jurisdiction cannot be waived. Federal-question jurisdiction rests on 28 U.S.C. § 1331; diversity rests on § 1332, requiring complete diversity and more than $75,000 in controversy. Personal jurisdiction requires minimum contacts plus fair play (International Shoe), typically purposeful availment, tested through long-arm statutes and Rule 4(k). Venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 is a separate question. Removal under §§ 1441 and 1446 must be filed within 30 days of service, and the forum-defendant rule bars removal in in-state diversity cases.
Vocabulary that gets tested
Appellant and appellee (not plaintiff and defendant) on appeal; affirmed, reversed, vacated, remanded, en banc, sua sponte, de novo, res judicata, stare decisis, mandamus, certiorari, motion in limine, voir dire.
Worked example
A plaintiff sues a Delaware corporation and one other defendant who is a citizen of the plaintiff's state, seeking $200,000. Is there diversity? No. Complete diversity fails because one defendant shares the plaintiff's citizenship, so § 1332 is unavailable regardless of the amount. If the claim instead arose under a federal statute, § 1331 would supply jurisdiction and § 1367 might add the related state claims.
Traps
- Treating venue as though it were jurisdiction.
- Missing the 30-day removal clock or the forum-defendant rule.
- Assuming a federal question automatically supports every related state claim.
- Confusing the Federal Circuit with the D.C. Circuit.
- Calling the party who won below the "appellant."