| Venue: | N.D. IL |
| Facts: | Skanes gets a mortgage from Ameriquest. They appraise her home at an allegedly inflated value, so as to qualify her for a larger loan and thereby increase profits. |
| Posture: | She sues with three claims: count 1 is a Truth In Lending Act claim against Ameriquest. Counts 2 and 3 are state law fraud counts. Motion to dismiss counts 2 and 3 under 12(b)(1) and § 1367(a) and (b) |
| Issue: | Supplemental jurisdiction? |
| Holding: | Yes. |
| Rule: | If resolution of a state claim might affect resolution of the federal claim, that's a good case for supplemental jurisdiction. |
| Reasoning: | Common operative facts are what we're looking for here. And in this case if counts 2 and 3 are dismissed, she mau not be able to get full relief under TILA (e.g., recission or damages). |
| Dicta: | |