28 U.S.C. § 1331

1,242 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 85 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Weller v. Dep't OF Soc. Servs. FOR the City OF Baltimore
  901 F.2d 387· 4th Cir.· 1990-04-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while most of the plaintiff's claims were properly dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, the complaint sufficiently alleged a procedural due process violation regarding the transfer of child custody without a hearing to warrant further factual inquiry.
• Judybill Osceola v. Fla. Dep't OF Revenue
  893 F.2d 1231· 11th Cir.· 1990-02-06 ·cited 12×
  The Tax Injunction Act bars individual Indians from bringing federal court actions to challenge state sales taxes, as Florida provides a plain, speedy, and efficient remedy in its state courts.
• In re Hall's Motor Transit Co.
  889 F.2d 520· 3d Cir.· 1989-11-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the bankruptcy court and district court correctly determined they lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the dispute over zoning enforcement was a non-core, non-related proceeding that did not affect the debtor's estate.
• Walden v. Bartlett
  840 F.2d 771· 10th Cir.· 1988-03-01 ·cited 12×
  The Feres doctrine bars damage claims by military personnel for injuries incident to service, but does not bar claims for injunctive or declaratory relief.
• Ne. Fed. Credit Union v. Neves
  837 F.2d 531· 1st Cir.· 1988-01-25 ·cited 12×
  The district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the state was the real party in interest, precluding diversity, and the proposed amendment to assert federal question jurisdiction was merely a defensive maneuver against a state law action.
• Laurel C. Thomas v. Shipka
  818 F.2d 496· 6th Cir.· 1987-05-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is the exclusive remedy for alleged constitutional violations by state officials, precluding direct constitutional claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. It also affirmed that claims under § 1983 are governed by Ohio's one-year statute of limitations
• Averbach v. Rival Mfg. Co.
  809 F.2d 1016· 3d Cir.· 1987-01-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a plaintiff's complaint alleging common law fraud in discovery responses, filed as an independent action, should not have been dismissed at the pleading stage, and that the one-year time limit for Rule 60(b)(3) motions does not apply to such independent action
• Dixie Elec. Coop. v. The Citizens OF the State OF Ala.
  789 F.2d 852· 11th Cir.· 1986-05-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the case was improperly removed because the district court lacked original jurisdiction, as the underlying state court action sought an advisory opinion on a hypothetical statutory scheme rather than a concrete case or controversy.
• Spectrum Leasing Corp. v. United States
  764 F.2d 891· D.C. Cir.· 1985-06-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Spectrum's claim, seeking payment for goods under a government contract, is founded upon that contract and thus falls under the Tucker Act, not the Administrative Procedure Act, depriving the district court of subject matter jurisdiction.
• Int'l Union v. Donovan
  756 F.2d 162· D.C. Cir.· 1985-03-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the precedent set in TRAC v. FCC should not be applied retroactively to void otherwise valid orders issued by the District Court prior to transfer.
• Beckham v. The NEW York City Hous. Auth.
  755 F.2d 1074· 2d Cir.· 1985-02-19 ·cited 12×
  Local housing authorities can establish a basic 'economic' rent schedule for tenants who fail to timely recertify their income and family composition, even if it exceeds statutory limitations, as the statute does not provide a method for such situations.
• Thomas v. Barry
  729 F.2d 1469· D.C. Cir.· 1984-03-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while federal question jurisdiction exists under the Home Rule Act, the appellants are not entitled to retain federal civil service rights after the District of Columbia implemented its own personnel system.
• Begay v. Albers
  721 F.2d 1274· 10th Cir.· 1983-11-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction and that forged deeds, even if approved by the Secretary of the Interior, do not terminate the trust status of Indian allotment lands if the allottee did not voluntarily consent to the conveyance.
• S. Pac. Transp. Co. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n OF the State OF Cal.
  716 F.2d 1285· 9th Cir.· 1983-09-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court's dismissal was proper because res judicata, based on the California Supreme Court's denial of review, barred Southern Pacific's preemption claim.
• Lotz Realty Co., Inc. v. United States Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  717 F.2d 929· 4th Cir.· 1983-09-19 ·cited 12×
  The League was the prevailing party entitled to a hearing on its motion for attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988.
• Jensen v. Schweiker
  709 F.2d 1227· 8th Cir.· 1983-06-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction to hear the inmate's constitutional challenge to the statute barring Social Security benefits for incarcerated felons, even without exhaustion of administrative remedies.
• Mich. Sav. & Loan League v. Francis
  683 F.2d 957· 6th Cir.· 1982-07-08 ·cited 12×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
• Exxon Corp. v. Hunt
  683 F.2d 69· 3d Cir.· 1982-06-30 ·cited 12×
  A federal court lacks jurisdiction over a suit seeking a declaratory judgment that a federal statute exempts plaintiffs from a state tax, as the federal issue constitutes a defense to a state law claim, and the Tax Injunction Act bars such suits when a plain, speedy, and efficien
• Baldwin v. Sears
  667 F.2d 458· 5th Cir.· 1982-02-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) does not expressly prohibit removal of cases to federal court, and that summary judgment was appropriate as no genuine issues of material fact existed.
• Gen. Motors Corp. v. Marshall
  654 F.2d 294· 4th Cir.· 1981-07-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the agency should have been permitted to remand the cases for reconsideration of disclosure decisions in light of Chrysler Corp. v. Brown, as the prior administrative decisions were based on unclear law and the agency requested a review under new guidelines.
• Sisk v. Tex. Parks & Wildlife Dep't
  644 F.2d 1056· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint, as the allegations stated a federal question and a claim upon which relief could be granted.
• Wheeler v. United States
  640 F.2d 1116· 9th Cir.· 1981-04-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a post-sentencing order restricting a prisoner's mail privileges, issued ex parte without notice, is equivalent to a sentence for the purpose of collateral attack under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and that the district court had jurisdiction to hear the petition to vaca
• Millard Griffith v. Bell-Whitley Cmty. Action Agency
  614 F.2d 1102· 6th Cir.· 1980-01-31 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the district court had jurisdiction over the constitutional claims, the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because the community action agency's actions did not constitute federal action. The court affirmed the dismissa
• Louise B. v. Aldo Coluatti
  606 F.2d 392· 3d Cir.· 1979-09-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the confidentiality and procedural due process claims, finding jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and pendent jurisdiction, and that the procedural due process claim was not foreclosed by Arnett v. Kennedy.
• Shands v. Tull
  602 F.2d 1156· 3d Cir.· 1979-07-24 ·cited 12×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The court held that the Social Security Act and its regulations require substantial, not total, compliance from states regarding welfare benefit appeal timelines, and New Jersey's performance met this standard.
• Housand v. Maxwell Heiman
  594 F.2d 923· 2d Cir.· 1979-03-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the plaintiff's constitutional claims were properly dismissed for lack of state action or bias, the case should be remanded to allow the plaintiff to amend his complaint to assert diversity jurisdiction.
• Litton Indus., Inc. v. Colon
  587 F.2d 70· 1st Cir.· 1978-11-20 ·cited 12×
  The Eleventh Amendment bars a federal contract action against the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and its officials, and the allegations do not support a civil rights claim against the individual defendants.
• Aurora Gazmin Navarro v. Dist. Dir. OF the United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  574 F.2d 379· 7th Cir.· 1978-04-12 ·cited 12×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The court held that the plaintiff's failure to qualify as a registered nurse within two years constituted good and sufficient cause for the Attorney General to revoke her third preference status petition, and that the INS was not estopped from doing so.
• Rauch v. United Instruments, Inc.
  548 F.2d 452· 3d Cir.· 1976-12-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Federal Aviation Act does not imply a private cause of action for aircraft owners seeking to recover economic losses incurred due to compliance with air safety regulations.
• Heath v. City OF Fairfax
  542 F.2d 1236· 4th Cir.· 1976-10-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a dispute over a municipal pay schedule ordinance does not present a federal question, and thus federal jurisdiction is lacking.
• Fisher v. The First Nat'l Bank OF Chicago
  538 F.2d 1284· 7th Cir.· 1976-07-29 ·cited 12×
  A national banking association's interest rate on any loan is governed by the laws of the state where the bank is located, not where the borrower resides.
• The Memphis Am. Fed'n OF Teachers v. The Bd. OF Educ. OF Memphis City Schs.
  534 F.2d 699· 6th Cir.· 1976-04-30 ·cited 12×·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The court held that the Board of Education's grant of exclusive privileges to the majority union did not violate the rival union's First Amendment rights and survived rational basis scrutiny under the Equal Protection Clause.
• Seneca Nursing Home v. The Kan. State Bd. OF Soc. Welf.
  490 F.2d 1324· 10th Cir.· 1974-01-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the state's cost-plus payment formula for nursing home services was inconsistent with Kansas statutes prior to a 1971 amendment, and affirmed the trial court's declaratory judgment.
• N.J. Welf. Rights Org. v. Cahill
  483 F.2d 723· 3d Cir.· 1973-08-10 ·cited 12×
  New Jersey's administrative changes to its AFDC program, converting to a flat grant system based on state-wide averages, did not violate federal statutory requirements under Social Security Act § 402(a)(23).
• Stevens v. Rayfield Carey
  483 F.2d 188· 7th Cir.· 1973-08-08 ·cited 12×
  A federal district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over a federal employee's claims against a union for expulsion and denial of due process, as neither Executive Order 10988 nor the Landrum-Griffin Act provides for such judicial remedies.
• Davis v. Shultz
  453 F.2d 497· 3d Cir.· 1971-12-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
• Morgan v. Melchar
  442 F.2d 1082· 3d Cir.· 1971-05-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as pre-induction judicial review of Selective Service classifications is generally barred by statute.
• Midwestern Developments, Inc. v. The City OF Tulsa
  333 F.2d 1009· 10th Cir.· 1964-07-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the complaint stated a claim for relief under federal law, reversing the dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
• Dicke v. Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes, Inc.
  304 F.2d 113· 10th Cir.· 1962-05-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma were not subject to suit in federal court absent express congressional consent, which was not provided by the relevant statute.
• Pembroke Huckins v. Duval Cnty.
  286 F.2d 46· 5th Cir.· 1960-12-28 ·cited 12×
  A claim does not arise under federal law merely because it involves a treaty or federal statute; the dispute must genuinely require construction or interpretation of that law to be resolved.
• Empire Pictures Distrib. Co., Inc. v. City OF Fort Worth
  273 F.2d 529· 5th Cir.· 1960-01-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that federal courts should not abstain from deciding cases involving the constitutionality of state or local laws, even when state law interpretation is involved, if the federal question is clear and the parties urge federal adjudication.
• Martinez v. Southern UTE Tribe
  273 F.2d 731· 10th Cir.· 1959-12-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim does not present a federal question, as it primarily concerns the tribe's internal membership designation rather than a dispute over the interpretation or application of federal law.
• Denton v. City of Carrollton
  235 F.2d 481· 5th Cir.· 1956-07-20 ·cited 12×
  The district court erred in declining jurisdiction; the exorbitant and punitive nature of the ordinance, coupled with uncertainty of tax recovery and risk of criminal penalties, warrants equitable relief.
• Hidalgo Cnty. Water Control & Improvement Dist. NO. 7 v. Wyatt C. Hedrick
  226 F.2d 1· 5th Cir.· 1955-09-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the treaty between the United States and Mexico did not create or protect individual water rights, nor did it alter existing state water law regarding distribution.
• Hasmukh Patel, M.D. v. Hamilton Med. Ctr., Inc.
  967 F.3d 1190· 11th Cir.· 2020-07-30 ·cited 11×
  A request for a declaratory judgment that a federal statute does not provide immunity from damages does not create federal-question jurisdiction because the statute only provides an affirmative defense and does not create a private right of action.
• Bodimetric Health Servs. v. AETNA Life & Cas.
  903 F.2d 480· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-25 ·cited 11×
  The court held that claims arising under the Medicare Act, even if brought under diversity jurisdiction and styled as state law claims, are subject to the Act's exclusive administrative review provisions and cannot be brought in federal court.
• United States ex rel. Yvonne Kishell v. Turtle Mountain Hous. Auth.
  816 F.2d 1273· 8th Cir.· 1987-04-27 ·cited 11×
  The court held that federal courts must defer to tribal courts to determine jurisdiction over matters concerning tribal self-government, even when diversity jurisdiction requirements are met.
• Kulick v. Pocono Downs Racing Ass'n
  816 F.2d 895· 3d Cir.· 1987-04-23 ·cited 11×
  A district court cannot use its factual findings from a preliminary injunction hearing regarding state action as conclusive for determining its own subject matter jurisdiction.
• Homewood Prof'l Care Ctr., Ltd. v. Heckler
  764 F.2d 1242· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-12 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed Homewood's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because Homewood failed to exhaust administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C. § 405(h).
• Quesada v. Dir., Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency
  577 F. Supp. 695· S.D. Fla.· 1983-12-29 ·cited 11×
  The court held that State Farm's homeowners policy excluded flood damage, but FEMA's flood insurance policy covered damage proximately caused by flooding from Tropical Storm Dennis, and FEMA waived the proof of loss requirement.