Abstract
The approach adopted by the Supreme Court in Finley v. United States calls into question not only pendent-claim jurisdiction but ancillary jurisdiction as well. Particularly vulnerable to attack are those uses of ancillary jurisdiction that involve the addition of new parties such as class action, intervention, and impleader. Furthermore, the opinion may lay a foundation for attacking ancillary-claim jurisdiction involving counterclaims or cross-claims. This commentary will examine Finley and the potential impact of the opinion on the various permutations of ancillary and pendent jurisdiction.
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1990
Recommended Citation
Wendy Collins Perdue, Finley v. United States: Unstringing Pendent Jurisdiction, 76 Va. L. Rev. 539 (1990)