Abstract
There has been a long‐standing debate concerning the status of diversity jurisdiction. Its champions wish to retain the availability of choice for attorneys, while others argue that perhaps the traditional justification is no longer valid and therefore the need for diversity jurisdiction is reduced. This research attempts to determine whether the traditional justification for diversity jurisdiction is still valid, and whether other factors motivate attorneys' choice of forum. An experimental design was employed to ascertain which of several factors including local bias, delay, availability of modem rules of procedure, and quality of state judges had an effect on an attorney's choice of forum in diversity cases.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
