In a class action with a single named plaintiff who is from State A and defendants from States B and C, the class includes members from several other states. For purposes of federal subject-matter jurisdiction, which statement is correct?

In a class action with a single named plaintiff who is from State A and defendants from States B and C, the class includes members from several other states. For purposes of federal subject-matter jurisdiction, which statement is correct?

• A. Diversity must be shown for all class members to be diverse from the defendants
• B. Diversity is determined by the named plaintiff(s) and named defendant(s) only
• C. Class actions cannot be heard in federal court for state claims
• D. Diversity is determined by the majority of class members

Answer: (B)

Under CAFA, federal jurisdiction in a class action turns on the citizenship of the named parties, not the entire class. The states of unnamed class members don’t affect diversity calculations. So, with a named plaintiff from State A and named defendants from States B and C, there is minimal diversity. If the other CAFA requirements (amount in controversy and class size) are met, the case can be in federal court. The class members’ additional states do not change that result.

Under CAFA, federal jurisdiction in a class action turns on the citizenship of the named parties, not the entire class. The states of unnamed class members don’t affect diversity calculations. So, with a named plaintiff from State A and named defendants from States B and C, there is minimal diversity. If the other CAFA requirements (amount in controversy and class size) are met, the case can be in federal court. The class members’ additional states do not change that result.