A jurisdiction question and a merits question
A classroom civil-procedure exercise supplies a complete jurisdiction test for its simplified claim: the opposing parties must have different state citizenship and the amount in controversy must exceed 75,000 units, excluding interest and costs. The stipulated sole plaintiff is a citizen of one state, the sole defendant a citizen of another, and the good-faith contract claim is 90,000 units. No other jurisdictional defect is part of this model. The defendant argues that the claim is unlikely to succeed on its facts. Students must distinguish the supplied authority-to-hear question from ultimate liability and apply all the stated conditions. The case is an explicit exercise model, not a finding that citizenship or amount alone resolves every real federal jurisdiction issue.
1. Does the supplied model test pass?
Read the worked answer
Yes. The parties have different stipulated citizenship and 90,000 exceeds 75,000 under the supplied complete model.
2. Does that establish the defendant liability?
Read the worked answer
No. Jurisdiction and the merits are different issues. The claim still needs the actual substantive and procedural requirements; a likely merits defense does not itself negate the stipulated jurisdiction conditions.