Legal Document

434 U.S. 236 98 Supreme Court Reporter 544 54 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 501 CHASE MANHATTAN BANK (NATIONAL ASSOCIATION)v.SOUTH ACRES DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, a partnership. Number 77-267. Decided Jan. 9, 1978. PER CURIAM. 1 The issue in this case is whether Congress has authorized the District of Guam to exercise federal diversity jurisdiction. Respondent brought suit Court, claiming that court had jurisdiction over its action on basis diverse citizenship. agreed, denied petitioner's motion dismiss for lack jurisdiction,1 Mailloux versus Mailloux, 417 F.Supp. 11 (1975), and divided Appeals affirmed. 554 Federal Reporter, 2nd 976 (CA9 1977). Because neither explicitly nor implicitly granted Guam, we reverse. 2 As part Organic Act created Guam. 64 Statutes-at-Large 389, 48 Code KF62 § 1424(a). was established "under Article IV, 3, Constitution rather than under III," Olsen, 431 195, 196-197, n. 1, 97 1774, 1776, 52 250 (1977),2 provided would have following jurisdiction: 3 "The shall district all causes arising Constitution, treaties, laws States, regardless sum or value matter controversy, original other which not been transferred by legislature courts it, such appellate as may determine." 4 Conspicuously absent provision any mention provision's first clause follows language federal-question statute, 28 1331, III, 2. second establishes local without regard applicable case, however, because 1974 Legislature cases from courts.3 Thus, only before us clause, grants see supra, also encompasses apparently reasoned cause with parties "arising . States," since 1332, law States. By logic, 1332 be within scope But stated "whatever ambiguities phrase 'arising [the States]'—it does embrace civil present questions law." U.S., at 202, S.Ct., 1779. same token, it short answer contention merely species itself distinguishes between these two types jurisdictions. certainly contemplates distinct classes cases; if they are distinct, grant one them confer .. discrimination made them, is, think, conclusive against their identity." American Insurance company Canter, Pet. 511, 545, 7 L.Ed. 242 (1828). 5 We reject notion Congress, extending Privileges Immunities Clauses t 1421b(u), intended F.2d, 977. This never held prohibit withholding restricting jurisdiction,4 there nothing legislative history 1421b(u) suggest effect Court's jurisdiction.5 Without support section, simply untenable interpret either conferring own terms impliedly expanding contained 6 recognize Congress' jurisdictional unique. All Territories concurrent many action. See 984 n.18 (Sneed, J., dissenting). Whether peculiar treatment preferable even wise, constrained principle limited Where, here, clearly appropriate limitations jurisdiction, compelled respect those limits. petition writ certiorari granted, decision reversed. 8 So ordered. interlocutory immediate appeal U. S. C. 1292 (b). are, therefore, faced question what limits place upon III. broad power IV course, well established. See, e. g., Binns 194 486, 24 816, 1087 (1904). Reorganization 1974, Public Law 12-85, 55. Ninth Circuit exclusive Court. Agana Bay Dev. (Hong Kong) 529 952, 955, n.4 (1976). 197 n.3, holding case. Indeed, 2, cl. Fourteenth Amendment restrict congressional—as opposed state—action. In fact, reveals intent "to limit territorial affect ." n.17 There view concerned ability citizens proper national S.Rep. 216, 90th Cong., 1st Sess., 12 (1967) (letter Feb. 19, 1967, Assistant Secretary Interior Harry R. Anderson Senator Henry M. Jackson, Chairman Committee Insular Affairs) (emphasis added); H.R.Rep. 1521, 14 (1968). It doubtful statement could serve sufficient concluding amended through oblique mechanism Clauses. could, here deny litigants "access III review local-court decisions 204, 1780. Only limitation 1424(a), quoted alter plain grant.

Classification Label: 8