University of South Florida Board of Trustees v. Comentis, Inc.
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 11734
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- The University of South Florida Board of Trustees (USF Board) sued CoMentis, Inc. in federal court asserting diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).
- The district court dismissed the complaint on the merits; on appeal the USF Board conceded it is an arm of the state for Eleventh Amendment purposes.
- The Eleventh Circuit addressed whether a state university board counts as a "citizen" of a state for diversity jurisdiction when it effectively functions as an arm of the state.
- The court applied the same multi-factor test used for Eleventh Amendment immunity (state definition, state control, state funding, and whether the state ultimately pays judgments) to determine citizenship for diversity purposes.
- The court found Florida defines USF as part of state government, the state heavily controls and appoints trustees, funds the university, and ultimately bears liability for judgments.
- Because the USF Board is an arm of the state, it is not a citizen for diversity jurisdiction and the federal court therefore lacked subject-matter jurisdiction; the case was vacated and remanded with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a state university board is a "citizen" for diversity jurisdiction | USF Board claimed diversity jurisdiction existed (suit between citizens of different states) | CoMentis argued a different five-factor test should apply for diversity (corporate powers focus) | The USF Board is not a citizen for diversity purposes because it is an arm of the state; diversity jurisdiction fails |
| Which test governs the arm-of-state inquiry for diversity jurisdiction | Plaintiff relied on Eleventh Amendment arm-of-state test (Tuveson four-factor approach) | Defendant urged use of Coastal Petroleum five-factor corporate-powers test | The Eleventh Amendment test controls; prior Eleventh Circuit precedent applies that test to citizenship analysis |
| Whether Coastal Petroleum establishes a different standard for diversity | Plaintiff noted Coastal did not change Eleventh Amendment approach | Defendant relied on Coastal's discussion of corporate powers factors | Coastal did not effect a different standard here; Coastal's outcome rested on distinct facts and prior precedent (Aerojet) |
| Remedy when a plaintiff-state arm concedes non-citizenship | Plaintiff sought adjudication on merits | Defendant argued dismissal for lack of jurisdiction | Court vacated judgment on merits and remanded with instruction to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Univ. of S. Ala. v. Am. Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405 (11th Cir. 1999) (Eleventh Circuit applying Eleventh Amendment test to diversity citizenship)
- Moor v. Alameda Cty., 411 U.S. 693 (U.S. 1973) (state is not a "citizen" for diversity jurisdiction)
- Tuveson v. Fla. Governor’s Council on Indian Affairs, Inc., 734 F.2d 730 (11th Cir. 1984) (four-factor test for determining whether an entity is an arm of the state)
- Williams v. Dist. Bd. of Trs. of Edison Cmty. Coll., Fla., 421 F.3d 1190 (11th Cir. 2005) (applying arm-of-state analysis to Florida community college)
- Coastal Petroleum Co. v. U.S.S. Agri–Chems., 695 F.2d 1314 (11th Cir. 1983) (discussed corporate-powers factors but did not displace Eleventh Amendment test)
- Aerojet-Gen. Corp. v. Askew, 453 F.2d 819 (5th Cir. 1971) (precedent relied on in Coastal concerning Eleventh Amendment immunity)
- Coll. Sav. Bank v. Fla. Prepaid Postsecondary Educ. Expense Bd., 527 U.S. 666 (U.S. 1999) (discussing waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity)