Abstract
This Article examines the effect of the U.S. Supreme Court’s jurisdictional tightening in Daimler and Walden on mass litigation. This Article shows how the Supreme Court’s changes to general and specific jurisdiction, considered together, end the practice of tactically allocating non-diverse plaintiffs across state lines to defeat diversity jurisdiction in nationwide litigation, a doctrine this Article terms fraudulent aggregation. This Article places the doctrine of fraudulent aggregation in the context of fraudulent joinder, the emerging doctrine of fraudulent misjoinder, and other attempts to avoid federal court jurisdiction through artful pleading. Examples from recent products liability litigation show both the application of the doctrine and the challenges facing its adoption—chiefly whether lower courts attempt to recreate general jurisdiction under the guise of expanded specific jurisdiction.
Recommended Citation
Jeff Lingwall and Chris Wray,
Fraudulent Aggregation: The Effect of Daimler and Walden on Mass Litigation,
69 Fla. L. Rev.
599
(2017).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/flr/vol69/iss2/6