III purposes is broader than the well-pleaded complaint rule. It is well-established that Congress may grant lower federal courts less than the totality of Article III's possible federal question jurisdiction; for example, before 1980, federal question jurisdiction had an amount in controversy requirement, similar to the requirement that still exists in diversity cases. By analogy, jurisdiction premised on diversity of citizenship in Article III is broader than the modern "total diversity" requirement under the jurisdictional statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332. For example, the Class Action Fairness Act allows federal jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship without total diversity; this is based on Article III's broader sweep. Later developments Following the dismissal of their case, the Mottleys brought a similar action in Kentucky state court. The state court held for them, and ordered the railroad to issue the passes. The railroad appealed to the Court of Appeals of Kentucky, Kentucky's highest court at the time, and lost. The railroad appealed again to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of the railroad, thereby handing the Mottleys yet another legal defeat. See also List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 211 List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 219 References External links Louisville & Nashville R. Co. v. Mottley Case Brief at Lawnix.com United States Constitution Article Three case law United States Supreme Court cases United States Supreme Court cases of the Fuller Court United States federal question jurisdiction case law Louisville and Nashville Railroad 1908 in United States case law Railway litigation in 1908 History of Louisville, Kentucky