Avitts v. Amoco Production Co.

Brief Fact Summary.

Appellees sought damages for injury to their property allegedly resulting from Appellant and other oil companies’ oil and gas operations. The original complaint contained references to “federal law” (although no specific federal law or cause of action); subsequent amended complaints omitted and/or contained no federal law references.  The Appellant removed the matter to federal court. The matter came before the federal Court of Appeals after the federal district court, to which the matter had been removed, entered a preliminary injunction requiring Appellants to pay interim costs and attorneys’ fees.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

Federal subject matter jurisdiction can be created only by pleading a cause of action within the federal district court’s original jurisdiction.

Facts.

Appellees sued Appellant, an oil company, along with other oil companies, in state court. Appellees sought damages for injury to their property allegedly resulting from oil and gas operations. The matter was removed to federal court based on the original complaint’s  references to “federal law” (although no specific federal law or cause of action); subsequent amended complaints omitted and/or contained no federal law references.  The matter came before the federal Court of Appeals after the federal district court, to which the matter had been removed, entered a preliminary injunction requiring the oil company to pay interim costs and attorneys’ fees.

Issue.

Did the district court have jurisdiction over this matter?

Held.

No. The district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction and was therefore without authority to enter the interim orders.

Discussion.

Subject matter jurisdiction cannot be created by simple reference to federal law (in this case, reference in the pretrial order to federal environmental laws of “questionable applicability”); no federal cause of action had ever been asserted and there was no basis for federal removal jurisdiction.