Venue and Conflict of Law Hypo

Little Timmy was playing with his toy gun.  He loved playing with it 
because unlike other toy guns, it not only looked real, but actually 
fired (harmless material) out with noise that sounded real too.  One day, 
an officer who was looking for a criminal mistook Little Timmy's toy gun 
for real and fired in his direction without looking to see if the person 
firing the gun was a criminal or not.  Little Timmy was badly hurt.  His 
father was naturally furious because his ex-wife should have known better 
than to give Little Timmy such a dangrous toy.  Besides, she should have 
asked him first since Little Timmy only visits herduring summertime in 
CA.  

Little Timmy's dad wants to bring suit on behalf of Little Timmy against 
the Toy Gun Co., the city of LA and the officer, and his ex-wife in a 
state court where he lives, Delaware.

Little Timmy's permanent residence is with his father, Delaware; however, 
as stated before he does live during the summertimes with his mom.  
Little Timmy's citizenship is in Delaware.  The Toy Gun Co. is 
unincorporated with place of manufacturing in Michigan, headquarter in 
CA, and production in Delaware.  The officer Smith who fired at Little 
Timmy is in CA as permanent resident and citizen.  Little Timmy's mom is 
permanent resident and citizen of CA.


Little Timmy's dad is bringing state claims as well as federal claims.  
(state against ex-wife, toy gun co., the city of LA, and the officer 
Smith:  fed against the city of LA)  The officer Smith doesn't like the 
fact that he has to defend himself in Delaware state court and 
subsequently asked the entire case to be removed.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If Little Timmy's dad wants all his claims in one lawsuit, is he able 
to?  Which may be brought under sumpplemental jurisdiction and which may not?

Is this case removable?  Assume diversity as the only subject matter and 
analyze.  
Next assume that Civil Rights Act giving rise to federal question as the 
only subject matter and analyze.

Is transfer to CA allowable?  Which law would dictate?
If transfer to CA occurs and then Defendants bring in motion that by CA 
state statute of limitation has run so the case should be dismissed, 
should the district court dismiss the case?

If the case was originally brought in federal district court, which 
districts would have the original jurisdiction?  Analyze as diversity 
case first then as federal question arising from Civil Rights Act next.

(I didn't think about personal jurisdiction when i drew up this hypo.  
Therefore, you can assume that there's personal jurisdiction and then go 
through the analysis.  Just for fun, you could also analyze by finding no 
personal jurisdiction against the officer, ex-wife, and the city of LA)