Ad
related to: examples of federal question jurisdiction
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
To meet the requirement of a case "arising under" federal law, the federal question must appear on the face of the plaintiff's complaint. [1] There has been considerable dispute over what constitutes a "federal question" in these circumstances, but it is now settled law that the plaintiff cannot seek the jurisdiction of a federal court merely ...
Pages in category "United States federal question jurisdiction case law" The following 9 pages are in this category, out of 9 total. This list may not reflect recent changes .
Subject-matter jurisdiction, also called jurisdiction ratione materiae, [1] is a legal doctrine regarding the ability of a court to lawfully hear and adjudicate a case. . Subject-matter relates to the nature of a case; whether it is criminal, civil, whether it is a state issue or a federal issue, and other substantive features of th
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.
Diversity jurisdiction is currently codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1332. In 1969, the American Law Institute explained in a 587-page analysis of the subject that diversity is the "most controversial" type of federal jurisdiction, because it "lays bare fundamental issues regarding the nature and operation of our federal union." [2]
The typical case involving a certified question involves a Federal court, which because of diversity, supplemental, or removal jurisdiction is presented with a question of state law. In these situations, the Erie doctrine [ 8 ] requires the Federal court that acquires jurisdiction over cases governed in part by state law to apply the ...
The Erie doctrine is a fundamental legal doctrine of civil procedure in the United States which mandates that a federal court called upon to resolve a dispute not directly implicating a federal question (most commonly when sitting in diversity jurisdiction, but also when applying supplemental jurisdiction to claims factually related to a federal question or in an adversary proceeding in ...
The adequate and independent state ground doctrine states that when a litigant petitions the U.S. Supreme Court to review the judgment of a state court which rests upon both federal and non-federal (state) law, the U.S. Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction over the case if the state ground is (1) “adequate” to support the judgment, and ...