Document: 538 U.S. 456 JINKSv.RICHLAND COUNTY, SOUTH CAROLINA, ET AL. No. 02-258. Supreme Court of United States. Argued March 5, 2003. Decided April 22, Title 28 U. S. C. § 1367 determines whether a federal district court with jurisdiction over civil action may exercise supplemental other claims forming part the same Article III "case or controversy." If declines to such jurisdiction, will be dismissed and must refiled in state court. To prevent limitations period on those from expiring while they are pending court, 1367(d) requires courts toll claim is for 30 days after its dismissal unless law provides longer tolling period. Petitioner filed federal-court claiming that Richland County (hereinafter respondent) others violated 42 1983 connection her husband's death. She also asserted wrongful death survival under South Carolina law. The District granted defendants summary judgment declined state-law claims. then won wrongful-death verdict against respondent. State reversed, finding time barred. Although would not have been barred 1367(d)'s rule, held unconstitutional as applied brought State's political subdivisions. Held: Section application subdivisions constitutional. Pp. 461-467. (a) rejects respondent's contention facially invalid because it exceeds Congress's enumerated powers. Rather, necessary proper executing power "[t]o constitute Tribunals inferior supreme Court," Art. I, 8, cl. 9, assuring tribunals fairly efficiently "[t]he judicial Power States," III, 1. As "necessity": It suffices conducive administration justice plainly adapted end. See McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 421. And propriety: Contrary claim, does violate state-sovereignty principles by regulating state-court procedures. 461-465. (b) Also without merit should interpreted apply Congress lacks I authority override immunity suit own courts, see Alden Maine, 527 706, but subject municipality if done pursuant valid powers, id., at 756. This merely consequence cases, which respondent ask overrule, holding municipalities do enjoy constitutionally protected suit. any suggestion an "unmistakably clear" statement required before Act expose local government liability cannot possibly reconciled Monell New York City Dept. Social Servs., 436 658. 465-467. 349 298, 563 E. 2d 104, reversed remanded. SCALIA, J., delivered opinion unanimous SOUTER, concurring opinion, post, p. 467. 1 CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CAROLINA. 2 Robert Peck argued cause petitioner. With him briefs were James Mixon Griffin Bradford P. Simpson. 3 Jeffrey A. Lamken States intervenor. On Solicitor General Olson, Assistant Attorney McCallum, Deputy Clement, Malcolm L. Stewart, Mark B. Stern, Alisa Klein. Andrew F. Lindemann County. brief William H. Davidson II David Morrison.* 5 JUSTICE SCALIA Court. 6 petitioner's lawsuit In doing so 1367(d), statute tolled during had previously lawsuits issue us validity constitutional determination. 7 * A 8 When has original action, independently come within form 1367(a) provides: 9 "Except provided subsections (c) expressly otherwise Federal statute, shall all related case controversy Constitution. Such include involve joinder intervention additional parties." 10 introductory clause suggests, every controversy" courts' decided court; §§ 1367(b) describe situations decline jurisdiction. 1367(c), example, states: 11 "The subsection — 12 "(1) raises novel complex law, 13 "(2) substantially predominates 14 "(3) 15 "(4) exceptional circumstances, there compelling reasons declining jurisdiction." 16 Thus, some them and, pursued, plaintiff was fruitlessly pursuing rule courts: 17 (a), voluntarily period." B 18 October 14, 1994, Carl Jinks arrested jailed failure pay child support. Four later, confined detention center, he died complications associated alcohol withdrawal. 1996, applicable limitations, petitioner Susan Jinks, Jinks's widow, respondent, center director, physician. Rev. Stat. 1979, 1983, Tort Claims Act. Code Ann. 15-78-10 et seq. (West Supp. 2002). November 20, 1997, defendants' motion two weeks later issued order remaining claims, dismissing prejudice 1367(c)(3). 19 December 18, After jury returned $80,000 appealed Court, ground subdivisions, "interferes sovereign establish extent suit." 304, 107 (2002). 20 We certiorari, 537 972 21 Respondent amici first contend powers Congress. disagree. Constitution empower periods give make Laws carrying into Execution [Congress's 8,] Powers vested this Government ...." 18. enactment prescribed alteration period;1 nor we ruled so. Stewart Kahn, Wall. 493 (1871), upheld criminal cases actions could prosecuted Civil War. reasoned both effect Government's war "remed[ied] evils" arisen war. "It strange result rebellion, protracting conflict, thus rid themselves their debts, Congress, wage suppress insurrection, no remedy evil, one consequences." Id., 507. 22 Of course nothing power. agree intervenor States, however, execution Const., assure can assuredly exist function absence long ago rejected view Necessary Proper Clause demands "`absolutely necessary'" 414-415 (1819). "conducive due justice" court,2 "plainly adapted" end, 417, alternative unsatisfactory options judges faced when retain might pre-§ world, three basic choices: First, condition defendant's waiver statute-of-limitations defense See, e. g., Duckworth Franzen, 780 645, 657 (CA7 1985); Financial Bankshares, Inc. Metzger, 680 768, 778 (CADC 1982). That refused, choices pursued. Second, even though more appropriately heard Newman Burgin, 930 955, 963-964 (CA1 1991) (collecting cases). produce obvious frustration statutory policy. third, dismiss allow reopen Rheaume Texas Public Safety, 666 925, 932 (CA5 obviously inefficient. By providing straightforward place regime, unquestionably promotes fair efficient operation therefore justice. 23 another reason: eliminates serious impediment access plaintiffs federal-and "derive common nucleus operative fact," Mine Workers Gibbs, 383 715, 725 (1966). Prior following unattractive options: (1) They file single run risk expired; (2) abandon right forum; (3) separate, timely litigation stayed resolution case, increase costs guarantee oblige. replaces selection inadequate assurance become 24 persuaded, deny, lower provide There either parties enacted "pretext" "the accomplishment objects entrusted [federal] government," McCulloch, supra, 423, between attenuated undermine enumeration set forth cf. Lopez, 514 549, 567-568 (1995); Morrison, 529 598, 615 (2000). 25 further contend, "proper" violates sovereignty. Printz 521 898, 923-924 (1997). views regulation "procedure," contends not, consistent Constitution, prescribe procedural rules adjudication purely Bellia, Regulation Procedures, 110 Yale J. 947 (2001); Congressional Authority Require Courts Use Certain Procedures Products Liability Cases, Op. Off. Legal Counsel 372, 373-374 (1989) (stating "potential questions" arise "attempts directly procedures followed products cases"). Assuming sake argument principled dichotomy drawn, purposes determining "proper," laws regulate "procedure" change "substance" rights think fall category immune congressional regulation. Respondent's reliance Sun Oil Co. Wortman, 486 717 (1988), "procedural" Full Faith Credit Clause, misplaced. noted very meaning "`substance'" "`procedure'" particular context "largely determined drawn." 726. For Erie R. Tompkins, 304 64 (1938), statutes treated substantive. Guaranty Trust York, 326 99 (1945). Wall., 506-507, ample support proposition substance-procedure posited falls "substantive" side line. sustain need (and not) hold unlimited practice procedure courts. 26 reject unconstitutional. 27 next maintains find merit. Act, 2002), confers upon tort than years injury discovered. view, extension sued constitutes impermissible abrogation "sovereign immunity." 706 (1999), tolls respect causes municipalities, reason why represents greater intrusion "state sovereignty" undisputed subjecting action. conditions yield enactments encroachment sovereignty," (which overrule) unlike 29 Nor construe absent statute's applicability Raygor Regents Univ. Minn., 534 533 (2002), subsequently grounds, did avoid interpreting manner raise "serious doubt" light our decisions protecting abrogation, 543. just explained, doubt arises State, subdivision definition "any (a)." (emphasis added). event, idea 658 (1978), "persons" 1983. 31 remanded proceedings inconsistent opinion. 32 ordered. Notes: Barbara Arnwine Thomas Henderson Lawyers' Committee Rights Under Law amicus curiae urging reversal. Briefs affirmance Alabama al. Pryor, Jr., Alabama, Nathan Forrester, General, Carter G. Phillips, Gene Schaerr, Attorneys respective follows: Ken Salazar Colorado, M. Jane Brady Delaware, Thurbert Baker Georgia, Bennett Hawaii, Steve Indiana, Miller Iowa, Carla Stovall Kansas, Mike Moore Mississippi, Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon Missouri, Samson Jersey, Wayne Stenehjem North Dakota, Drew Edmondson Oklahoma, Charlie Condon Carolina, Paul Summers Tennessee, Greg Abbott Texas, Shurtleff Utah, Jerry Kilgore Virginia; Council Governments Richard Ruda I. Crowley. See,e. Soldiers' Sailors' Relief 1940, 50 App. 525 ("The military service included computing now hereafter limited regulation, bringing proceeding ... person service"); 9658(a)(1) ("In personal injury, property damages, caused contributed exposure hazardous substance, pollutant contaminant, released environment facility, (as specified law) commencement date earlier federally date, commence lieu statute"); 108(c) ("Except section 524 title, nonbankruptcy fixes commencing continuing bankruptcy debtor expired filing petition, expire until end period, including suspension occurring case; notice termination expiration stay 362, 922, 1201, 1301 be, claim"). Chief Justice Marshall's description inMcCulloch way example legislation punishing perjury Clause. Wheat., 417. 33 concurring. 34 joining today, signal my dissent 760 (1999).

Category: 8