Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In United States law, federal question jurisdiction is a type of subject-matter jurisdiction that gives United States federal courts the power to hear civil cases where the plaintiff alleges a violation of the United States Constitution, federal law, or a treaty to which the United States is a party. The federal question jurisdiction statute is ...
Souter, joined by unanimous. Concurrence. Thomas. Laws applied. 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering & Mfg., 545 U.S. 308 (2005), was a United States Supreme Court decision [1] involving the jurisdiction of the federal district courts under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question jurisdiction). [2]
However, if any defendant is a citizen of the state where the action is first filed, diversity does not exist. 28 U.S.C. §1441(b). If a plaintiff or a co-defendant opposes removal, he may request a remand, asking the federal court to send the case back to the state court. A remand is rarely granted if the diversity and amount in controversy ...
The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) is a United States law, codified at Title 28, §§ 1330, 1332, 1391 (f), 1441 (d), and 1602–1611 of the United States Code, that established criteria as to whether a foreign sovereign state (or its political subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities) is immune from the jurisdiction of the ...
The enabling statute for diversity jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, grants the district courts jurisdiction in a most types of actions, so long as they meet two basic conditions: Complete diversity requirement. No defendant is a citizen of the same state as any plaintiff. Amount in controversy requirement. The matter in controversy exceeds $75,000.
The U.S. Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 (d), 1453, 1711–15, expanded federal subject-matter jurisdiction over many large class action lawsuits and mass actions in the United States. The bill was the first major piece of legislation of the second term of the Bush Administration. Business groups and tort reform ...
Plaintiff American Well Works Co. manufactured, sold, and held the patent to a particular type of pump, which was known to be the best on the market. The plaintiff sued defendant Layne & Bowler Co. on the grounds that defendant had maliciously libeled and slandered plaintiff's title to the pump by stating that the pump, and certain of its component parts, were infringements upon defendant's pump.
It also invoked §27 the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Manning, 578 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held, 8–0, that the jurisdictional test established by §27 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is the same as 28 U.S.C. § 1331's [1] test for ...