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

• Oil Res., Inc. v. Florida
  583 F. Supp. 1027· S.D. Fla.· 1984-04-06
  The court held that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiffs failed to present a genuine federal question.
• The Bd. OF Elec. Light Comm'rs OF the City OF Burlington v. McCARREN
  725 F.2d 176· 2d Cir.· 1983-12-30
  The court held that the district court properly granted summary judgment, finding that the Federal Power Act preempts state regulation of hydroelectric projects licensed by FERC and that the state board was precluded from relitigating issues already decided.
• Schlomann v. Ramsdell
  720 F.2d 20· 8th Cir.· 1983-11-01
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for relief from judgment.
• Coleman v. The United States
  715 F.2d 1156· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-19
  The district court correctly determined it lacked jurisdiction over the plaintiffs' claims for breach of trust regarding unallotted Indian lands.
• Fallis v. Ambach
  710 F.2d 49· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-10
  The court held that the parents' and children's claims under the EHA procedural safeguards provision were premature because the children's placement had not been curtailed or eliminated, and that Jowonio's claims were too insubstantial for preliminary injunctive relief.
• Chaffin v. Taylor
  521 F. Supp. 1344· M.D. Fla.· 1981-09-16
  A parent receiving AFDC benefits on the basis of incapacity can establish eligibility by demonstrating inability to support OR care for their minor children, and states cannot deny benefits based solely on the ability to 'care' without considering the ability to 'support'.
• Boyster v. Roden
  628 F.2d 1121· 8th Cir.· 1980-09-02 ·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The court held that the fiduciary duties of officers of federally chartered production credit associations are not governed by federal common law, and thus the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
• Blomberg v. Schneiderheinz
  632 F.2d 698· 8th Cir.· 1980-08-29 ·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The court held that dismissal without prejudice was not an error, allowing plaintiffs to replead if they can establish the "color of law" element.
• The Hearth, Inc. v. Dep't OF Pub. Welf.
  612 F.2d 981· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-03
  The court held that the appellant's complaint was fatally defective for failing to state an adequate basis for federal jurisdiction.
• Pratt v. Kelly
  585 F.2d 692· 4th Cir.· 1978-10-20 ·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because Virginia retained civil jurisdiction over the Blue Ridge Parkway, meaning the state's wrongful death statute did not become a law of the United States.
• Schofield v. Cnty. OF Volusia
  580 F.2d 729· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-20
  The court held that the district court's dismissal order must be vacated and the case reconsidered in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Monell v. Department of Social Services of New York.
• Mendenhall Enters., Inc. v. Currier
  564 F.2d 1239· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-14
  The court held that a contract dispute, even if referencing terms that may have a specialized meaning under federal law, does not automatically create federal question jurisdiction if the contract itself is not created by or dependent upon federal law and there is no diversity of
• People OF the State OF Ill. ex rel. John J. Bowman v. Home Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n & Reserve Sav. & Loan Ass'n
  521 F.2d 704· 7th Cir.· 1975-08-19
  The court held that the State's Attorney, not being a member of the class he sought to represent, lacked standing under Rule 23 to bring the class action, thus affirming the dismissal of the complaint.
• Bayou Auguste Tenants Org. v. Romney
  506 F.2d 713· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-17 ·via 28 U.S.C. § 1331(A)
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish their right to maintain the litigation as a class action, thus affirming the dismissal for want of jurisdiction.
• Jolly v. United States
  488 F.2d 35· 5th Cir.· 1974-01-11
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to establish the jurisdictional amount required by 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
• Salazar v. Eads
  466 F.2d 765· 7th Cir.· 1972-08-11
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding the constitutionality of the Indiana Uniform Criminal Extradition Act were insubstantial and did not present a substantial federal question, thus the district court correctly dismissed the action for lack of jurisdiction.
• Eldridge v. Tarr
  462 F.2d 1009· 9th Cir.· 1972-06-29
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted his administrative remedies by failing to appeal his I-A classification, thus his suit for pre-induction review was premature.
• MacOmber v. Bose
  401 F.2d 545· 9th Cir.· 1968-10-04
  The court held that a dispute over water rights on privately owned land within Glacier National Park gives rise to federal jurisdiction because the United States assumed exclusive jurisdiction over the park's territory, including private lands, through cession and acceptance.
• McALLISTER v. State OF NEW Jersey
  396 F.2d 776· 3d Cir.· 1968-06-26
  The court held that the State of New Jersey was immune from suit and that Chief Justice Weintraub was protected by judicial immunity, thus the district court properly dismissed the complaint.
• Miller v. Cnty. OF LOS Angeles
  364 F.2d 500· 9th Cir.· 1966-07-21
  The court held that the summary judgment for the appellee was proper because there was no genuine issue of material fact and the action was barred by California tax statutes.
• Schroeder v. State OF Ill.
  354 F.2d 561· 7th Cir.· 1965-11-02
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the case for want of jurisdiction, as the plaintiffs' claims did not present a federal question or a basis for federal court review of state court proceedings.
• Debevoise v. Rutland Ry. Corp.
  291 F.2d 379· 2d Cir.· 1961-06-08
  The federal district court lacked jurisdiction to remove the case from state court and issue an injunction, as the state's petition for receivership did not present a federal question.
• Williams v. City OF Wichita
  279 F.2d 375· 10th Cir.· 1960-05-23
  The court affirmed the dismissal without prejudice, holding that the trial court properly abstained from exercising jurisdiction to allow state courts to determine crucial questions of state water law.
• Towers v. Kanner
  260 F.2d 605· 5th Cir.· 1958-11-14
  The court held that the appellant's claim was moot because the statute he challenged had been repealed, and thus his federal jurisdiction claim was unfounded.
• Almeida Bus Lines, Inc. v. Curran
  209 F.2d 680· 1st Cir.· 1954-01-21
  A federal court of equity should not enjoin state administrative proceedings or issue a declaratory judgment when the party seeking relief has not demonstrated clear and imminent irreparable injury.
• Whelan v. Riley
  205 F.2d 513· 5th Cir.· 1953-06-30
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction because the complaint failed to allege the requisite jurisdictional amount and a substantial federal question.