U.S. Code » Title 48 » Chapter CHAPTER 17— NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— JUDICIAL MATTERS

48 U.S.C. § 1822

Jurisdiction of District Court; original jurisdiction; procedural requirements

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 48 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) The District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands shall have the jurisdiction of a District Court of the United States, including, but not limited to, the diversity jurisdiction provided for in section 1332 of title 28 and that of a bankruptcy court of the United States.(b) The district court shall have original jurisdiction in all causes in the Northern Mariana Islands not described in subsection (a) jurisdiction over which is not vested by the Constitution or laws of the Northern Mariana Islands in a court or courts of the Northern Mariana Islands. In causes brought in the district court solely on the basis of this subsection, the district court shall be considered a court of the Northern Mariana Islands for the purposes of determining the requirements of indictment by grand jury or trial by jury.(Pub. L. 95–157, § 2, Nov. 8, 1977, 91 Stat. 1266; Pub. L. 98–454, title IX, § 902, Oct. 5, 1984, 98 Stat. 1744.)Editorial NotesCodification

Section was formerly classified to section 1694a of this title.

Amendments

1984—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 98–454 amended subsec. (a) generally, substituting “, including, but not limited to, the diversity jurisdiction provided for in section 1332 of title 28 and that of a bankruptcy court of the United States” for “, except that in all causes arising under the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States, it shall have jurisdiction regardless of the sum or value of the matter in controversy”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1984 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–454 effective on ninetieth day following Oct. 5, 1984, see section 1005 of Pub. L. 98–454, set out as a note under section 1424 of this title.

Effective Date

For effective date of this section, see section 1825 of this title and Effective Date of Constitution note thereunder.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 2002–2017 · leading case: Nguyen v. United States, 539 U.S. 69 (2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nguyen v. United States, 539 U.S. 69 (2003). · cites it 2× “" 48 U. S. C. § 1822 . The text of the statute closely follows the corresponding provisions of the Organic Act of Guam.”
Armstrong v. Commonwealth of N. Mariana Islands, 576 F.3d 950 (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “This instrument, which governs the CNMI’s political relationship with the United States, provides that the United States District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands (“NMI district court”), as a court established under Article IV of the United States Constitution, shall have…”
United States v. Matthews, 58 F. Supp. 3d 115 (D.D.C. 2014). “§ 1424 , the Northern Mariana Islands, see 48 U.S.C. § 1822 , and the Virgin Islands, see 48 U.”
Trinidad v. Pangelinan, 32 F. App'x 357 (9th Cir. 2002). “Because the district court of CNMI maintains original jurisdiction over federal question cases including actions arising under the federal RICO statute, which was enacted in 1970, and applies to the CNMI, see 48 U.S.C. § 1822 , the district court properly exercised jurisdiction…”
Commonwealth Utils. Corp. v. Goltens Trading & Eng'g PTE Ltd., 313 F.3d 541 (9th Cir. 2002). “§ 1332 and 48 U.S.C. § 1822 . . The requested question reads as follows: Under CNMI law, where an engineering firm contracts to provide professional services to a utility in connection with the inspection, repair and overhaul of power generating equipment and the negligent…”
Armstrong v. CNMI (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “See Covenant § 402(a), codified as amended at 48 U.S.C. § 1822 ; see also Nguyen v. United States, 539 U.”
Nosek v. Saipan Sea Ventures, Inc. (N. Mar. I. 2017). “that of a bankruptcy 22 court of the United States,” 48 U.S.C. § 1822 (a). There is no need to decide this issue, however, 23 because SSV never came to this Court (sitting in bankruptcy or otherwise) to seek permission 24 1 before it filed its third-party complaint in…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.