Virginian Hotel (Medicine Bow, Wyoming) and Supplemental jurisdictionThe Virginian Hotel is a historic hotel in Medicine Bow, Wyoming, United States. Construction on the hotel began in 1901 and was completed in 1911. It was built by August Grimm, the first mayor of Medicine Bow, and his partner George Plummer. The hotel is thought to be named for the famous novel written in Medicine Bow, The Virginian by Owen Wister. Although it provided a place for cowboys and railroad workers to stay while they were in town, the hotel was actually built to serve a much broader clientele. It became a headquarters for all to meet and eat as well as a setting for many business dealings.The significance of the hotel rests upon its architecture and its history. The building is massive in size for a town the size of Medicine Bow, which has less than 500 residents. The hotel has served as a landmark for the town of Medicine Bow as well as a Historic Landmark for the state of Wyoming for nearly 100 years].Contents 1 Construction and architecture 2 Location 3 History 4 References 5 External linksConstruction and architectureThe original building is a 3½ story structure built in a freely adapted example of Renaissance Revival in the Italian Style. Its simplicity of outline and symmetrical exterior lines are evidence of its Renaissance Revival architecture. It is constructed of concrete blocks containing sand drawn from the Medicine Bow River and fashioned at the building site. Along with the significance of the size and architecture of the hotel, it boasts the first electric lights and sewer in town.The hotel proper is papered in Victorian gold and burgundy medallion wallpaper, has velvet draperies and pressed tin on its 12 foot high ceilings. The main floor has a "Eating House," the formal "Owen Wister Dining Room," and the "Shiloh Saloon," which still has bullet holes riddled throughout to remind guests of some past shootout. The rooms have antique brass beds, tulip-shape lights are still heated by steam radiators. Only the suites have private baths, replete with claw foot bathtubs. The other rooms have access to separate bath facilities located in the halls. True to its time, the rooms in the original hotel do not have modern amenities such as telephones or televisions. LocationUpon completion, it was the biggest hotel between Denver and Salt Lake City. It is located midway between Laramie and Rawlins, Wyoming on the Old Lincoln Highway (U.S. Route 30). HistoryOn September 30, 1911, the Virginian celebrated its grand opening.In 1957, two cement block extensions were added on the hotel; one of which was, until recently, used as living quarters for the hotel owners but now contains rental units. These newer unit have coffee makers, small refrigerators, phones, cable TV as well as their own attached bathrooms.In 1978, the Virginian Hotel was added to the National Register of Historic Places.The hotel had a grand reopening in 1984, after it had been completely renovated and restored to its current turn of the century decor.
Supplemental jurisdiction and Virginian Hotel (Medicine Bow, Wyoming)Supplemental jurisdiction is the authority of United States federal courts to hear additional claims substantially related to the original claim even though the court would lack the subject-matter jurisdiction to hear the additional claims independently. 28 U.S.C. § 1367 is a codification of the Supreme Court's rulings on ancillary jurisdiction (Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S. 365 (1978)) and pendent jurisdiction (United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715 (1966)) and a superseding of the Court's treatment of pendent party jurisdiction (Finley v. United States, 490 U.S. 545 (1989)).It's important to note that historically there was a distinction between pendent jurisdiction and ancillary jurisdiction. But, under the ruling in Exxon, that distinction is no longer meaningful. Supplemental jurisdiction refers to the various ways a federal court may hear either: state law claims, claims from parties who lack the amount in controversy requirement of diversity jurisdiction, when defendants are joined in claims, or when multiple plaintiffs are joined in claims, like in class action suits.Contents 1 Definition 2 Pendent jurisdiction 3 Ancillary jurisdiction 4 References 5 External linksDefinitionBy default, courts have supplemental jurisdiction over "all other claims that are so related . . . that they form part of the same case or controversy" (§ 1367(a)). The true test being that the new claim "arises from the same set of operative facts." This means a federal court hearing a federal claim can also hear substantially related state law claims, thereby encouraging efficiency by only having one trial at the federal level rather than one trial in federal court and another in state court. However, if the case is brought as a diversity action (i.e., the basis for federal jurisdiction is that each defendant comes from a state different than each plaintiff), there generally is no supplemental jurisdiction if such claims would destroy complete diversity. See Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Services, Inc. Courts are also free to decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction in specified or exceptional circumstances (§ 1367(c)). Pendent jurisdictionPendent jurisdiction is the authority of a United States federal court to hear a closely related state law claim against a party already facing a federal claim, described by the Supreme Court as "jurisdiction over nonfederal claims between parties litigating other matters properly before the court." Such jurisdiction is granted to encourage both "economy in litigation", and fairness by eliminating the need for a separate federal and state trial hearing essentially the same facts yet potentially reaching opposite conclusions.Pendent jurisdiction refers to the court's authority to adjudicate claims it could not otherwise hear. The related concept of pendent party jurisdiction by contrast is the court's authority to adjudicate claims against a party not otherwise under the court's jurisdiction because the claim arises from the same nucleus of facts as another claim properly before the court.The leading case on pendent jurisdiction is United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs, 383 U.S. 715 (1966). Gibbs has been read to require that (1) there must be a federal claim (whether from the Constitution, federal statute, or treaty) and (2) the non-federal claim arises "from a common nucleus of operative fact" such that a plaintiff "would ordinarily be expected to try them in one judicial proceeding."The holding in Gibbs has been essentially codified by Congress along with ancillary jurisdiction in 28 U.S.C. § 1367, its supplemental jurisdiction statute. However, Subsection §1367(c)(3) expressly authorizes the district court to dismiss a supplemental claim when the district court has dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction. Ancillary jurisdictionAncillary jurisdiction is a form of supplemental jurisdiction that allows a United States federal court to hear non-federal claims sufficiently logically dependent on a federal "anchor claim" (i.e., a federal claim serving as the basis for supplemental jurisdiction), despite that such courts would otherwise lack jurisdiction over such claims. Ancillary jurisdiction differs from pendent jurisdiction in that pendent jurisdiction requires the federal and non-federal claims to arise from a "common nucleus of operative fact," (per "United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs") not to be logically interdependent. Like pendent jurisdiction, a federal court can exercise ancillary jurisdiction if the anchor claim has original federal jurisdiction either through federal-question jurisdiction or diversity jurisdiction.Areas where ancillary jurisdiction can be asserted include counterclaims (Fed. R. Civ. P. 13), cross-claims (Fed. R. Civ. P. 13), impleader (Fed. R. Civ. P. 14), interpleader (Fed. R. Civ. P. 22) and interventions (Fed. R. Civ. P. 24). Impleader claims are a paradigmatic example of ancillary jurisdiction, given the tendency of such claims to arise under state contract law, but be entirely dependent on the original claim.Moore v. New York Cotton Exchange and Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Kroger are seminal cases relating to ancillary jurisdiction.Ancillary jurisdiction has been replaced entirely by supplemental jurisdiction, per 28 U.S.C. § 1367(b), part of the U.S. supplemental jurisdiction statute.
141/766 138 139 140 142 143 144 keramik