enow.com Web Search

Search results

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

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concurrent_jurisdiction

    Title 28 of the United States Code, sections 1331 & 1332 give federal courts concurrent jurisdiction with the state courts over federal question and diversity cases.

  3. 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 ...

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

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

    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).

  5. 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 ...

  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. List of pending United States Supreme Court cases - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pending_United...

    Whether a plaintiff can state a claim by alleging that a plan fiduciary engaged in a transaction constituting a furnishing of goods, services, or facilities between the plan and a party in interest, as proscribed by , or whether a plaintiff must plead and prove additional elements and facts not contained in the provision’s text.

  8. Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_Action_Fairness_Act...

    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.

  9. Title 28 of the United States Code - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_28_of_the_United...

    Title 28 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure) is the portion of the United States Code (federal statutory law) that governs the federal judicial system. It is divided into six parts: Part I: Organization of Courts