Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
An accountant from State A sued a biologist from State A in a federal court in State A. The accountant did not state a claim based on federal law in her complaint. However, the accountant believes the biologist will use a federal law in his defense.
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. The federal question must appear as part of the accountant's cause of action as set out in a well-pleaded complaint. Any other pleadings, filed by the accountant or the biologist, are not relevant to establishing federal question jurisdiction.
B is incorrect. The federal question must appear as part of the accountant's cause of action in a well-pleaded complaint. The court may not look to a defense asserted by the biologist in an answer, or any other pleading, to determine whether the accountant's complaint raises a federal question.
D is incorrect. As stated above, the accountant is required to state the federal question underlying the cause of action in the complaint. No anticipated defense or counterclaim by the biologist, whether included in the complaint or not, will establish federal question jurisdiction.