enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Federal question jurisdiction - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_question_jurisdiction

    Article III of the United States Constitution permits federal courts to hear such cases, so long as the United States Congress passes a statute to that effect. However, when Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1789, which authorized the newly created federal courts to hear such cases, it initially chose not to allow the lower federal courts to possess federal question jurisdiction for fear ...

  3. Grable & Sons Metal Products, Inc. v. Darue Engineering & Mfg.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grable_&_Sons_Metal...

    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).

  4. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co. v. Mottley - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisville_&_Nashville...

    25 Stat. 434, c. 866 (then-current federal question jurisdiction statute; current analogue 28 U.S.C. § 1331) Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company v. Mottley , 211 U.S. 149 (1908), was a United States Supreme Court decision that held that under the existing statutory scheme, federal question jurisdiction could not be predicated on a ...

  5. The question raised was whether the federal district courts have original federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 [2] when a claim arises out of a federal statute that has not specifically granted a private right to a cause of action. The case considered several different tests to determine when a case is covered under original ...

  6. American Well Works Co. v. Layne & Bowler Co. - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Well_Works_Co._v...

    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.

  7. Subject-matter jurisdiction - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subject-matter_jurisdiction

    The enabling statute for federal question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1331, provides that the district courts have original jurisdiction in all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. As mentioned before, this jurisdiction by default is not exclusive; states can also hear claims based on federal law.

  8. Amount in controversy - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amount_in_controversy

    Congress did not create a consistent federal question jurisdiction, which allows federal courts to hear any case alleging a violation of the Constitution, laws, and treaties of the United States, until 1875, when Congress created the statute which is now found at 28 U.S.C. § 1331: "The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all ...

  9. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Manning

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrill_Lynch,_Pierce...

    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 deciding if a case "arises under" a federal law.