Venue: |
5th Cir.
|
|
Facts: |
Plant borrows $2,520 from Blazer and never makes any payment. Then
a year later she sues under the truth-in-lending act. |
|
Posture: |
Counterclaim for the unaid balance. The court finds that Blazer
did fail to disclose some stuff, awards Plant a total of
$1,644.76. Court also finds for Blazer on the unpaid debt,
so she owes the difference. She appeals. |
|
Issue: |
Three of them, initially, but we're only concerned with one:
- Did the court have jurisdiction to hear the counterclaim?
|
Kind of a lame use of an ordered list, eh?
|
Holding: |
Yes, affirmed. |
|
Rule: |
Debt counterclaims are compulsory. |
|
Reasoning: |
If a counterclaim is compulsory, it's covered by supplemental jurisdiction.
There are four tests available to decide:
- Are the issues of fact and law largely the same?
- Would res judicata bar a subsequent suit on the
defendant's claim?
- Will substantially the same evidence be used to support
or refute either claim?
- Is there a logical relation between claim and counterclaim?
Test #4 is the most common, and it's nice and flexible.
|
|
Dicta: |
|
|