federal court doctrine whereby a plaintiff, notwithstanding the limitations of federal question jurisdiction, may rely upon both federal and nonfederal grounds for the relief sought in a complaint. Thus, where the plaintiff joins a federal claim with a state law claim based on closely related or identical conduct of the defendant, the federal courts have jurisdiction to hear and determine the state law claims as well as those arising under federal law. See abstention; jurisdiction [PENDENT JURISDICTION].
Compare ancillary jurisdiction.
Source: Barron's Dictionary of Legal Terms, Steven H. Gifis, 5th Edition; © 2016
"In this case, once the amended complaint was accepted by the district court, the original complaint was superceded and there was no longer a federal claim on which the district court could exercise supplemental jurisdiction for the remaining state law claims."
"The Supreme Court concluded that the withdrawal of allegations in an amended complaint which had formed the basis of federal jurisdiction defeats jurisdiction."
"When Pintando amended his complaint and failed to include a Title VII claim or any other federal claim, the basis for the district court's subject-matter jurisdiction ceased to exist, and the district court should have dismissed Pintando's state claims without prejudice. See Scarfo v. Ginsberg, 175 F.3d 957, 962 (11th Cir.1999)"
- Pintando v Miami Dade, 501 F.3d 1241 (11th Cir. 2007)