October Term 2003 · Docket 02-1689
Does a post-filing citizenship change create retroactive diversity jurisdiction?
The dispute centers on whether a party's later change in citizenship cures a prior lack of complete diversity.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Boyce argued that Atlas' post-filing citizenship change should not create retroactive jurisdiction.
Mr. Greenberg argued that the trial court had jurisdiction because diversity existed at trial.
chief_justice_rehnquist
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 2-33 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 2-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 14-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-12 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 40-42 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 40-42
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the timing of diversity jurisdiction. One side argues jurisdiction exists if diversity is present at trial. The other side argues jurisdiction must exist at filing.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 2-33 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 2-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 14-38
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 3, 2004.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-12 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-12
What each side wants
Atlas wants the Court to affirm the Fifth Circuit judgment.
Atlas wants the Court to hold that the trial court had jurisdiction at trial.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 2-33 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 2-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 14-38
What each side says
Atlas argues that a post-filing citizenship change cures the lack of complete diversity.
Dataflux argues that a post-filing citizenship change cannot create retroactive diversity jurisdiction.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 2-33 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 2-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 14-38
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if the case was submitted.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 40-42 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 40-42
Why it matters
This case defines when federal courts gain diversity jurisdiction. It determines whether parties can cure jurisdictional defects after filing. It affects access to federal courts for diverse parties.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 2-33 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 2-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 14-38
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-12 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 40-42 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 40-42
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 2-33 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 2-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 14-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 2-33 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 2-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 14-38
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.