An upscale restaurant in New York, New York paid a considerable sum for the entire harvest of ice wine from a small grower in Vermont. After receiving and testing the wine cases, the restaurant realized the grapes used to make the wine had spoiled, probably upon re-thawing, when ice crystals can disrupt the fruit. They requested to return the wine, but the grower refused to believe that there was a problem. The restaurant files a claim against the winery in federal court, citing diversity as the basis for subject matter jurisdiction. The amount in controversy is over $75,000 and both the restaurant and the grower are incorporated in Delaware. Can the federal court hear this case?

Respuesta :

Answer:

No, The federal court wouldn't be able to hear this case.

Explanation:

After the reading the case, I believe the requirements for diversity jurisdiction are not met.

According to the Law, there are two basic requirements for diversity jurisdiction:

- 1st Requirement is that the monetary value of the dispute exceeds $75,000 (they passed this requirement)

- 2nd Requirement is that both the accuser and the accused cannot shares a state of citizenship. (They do not passed this Requirement )

Pay attention to this sentence:

". . .both the restaurant and the grower are incorporated in Delaware"

The law considered corporation to be a citizen. Its citizenship is determined by the place where the corporation was incorporated. In this case, both of them are considered to be citizens of Delaware.